Should Kerry have voted for both $87 billions?

[MattNC]

I understand his 'protest' vote against the $87 billion, but does anyone else think he should've voted for it anyway? This way he could've gone on the attack against Bush threatening to veto it and not give the Bush campaign the ammunition of him voting against it once as well to fire back with.

[schultzee]

1. NO! I called my senator and asked her not to vote for it. It did not

include necessary items for the troops and controls on use.

[BlueEyedSon]

2. Of course not, it was illegal for the Congress to abrogate their war power

Period.

[goodhue]

3. Absolutely not.

[ClassWarrior]

4. The $87 billion was never in question.

The two bills were about how to FUND it.

Kerry supported the one that funded it with loans to Iraq and repealing tax cuts for the fat cats.

Bush* supported the one that funded it with OUR TAX DOLLARS.

The more important questions: (1) why were the troops sent to war without the proper equipment in the first place, and (2) why haven't they gotten it YET??

[kentuck]

5. If his vote had been meaningful, he would have voted for it....

However, it was more useful as a protest vote because it brought attention to the Bush scheme....

[PurityOfEssence]

6. No, but he should be more obvious in pointing out that it was a bad bill

If the soldiers were in dire need for immediate resupply, Kerry would not have stood in the way. What this was was an opportunistic, unmonitored looting by Halliburton, Bechtel and others. The issue should have been turned around like this: if there are urgent issues for the troops, put them in a separate bill and we'll push them through. Since you're just playing games to embezzle more of the peoples' money from the Treasury, then let's follow the Constitution and reach consensus, instead of acceding to the demands of an imperious President who requires absolute fealty and uses it for personal gain. I say personal gain because he will personally profit greatly from his Daddy's interest in Carlyle alone, not to mention other ties and the opening of the sluice of campaign support from the defense industry.

It was a bad bill. If the Republicans cared about the troops and they were sorely lacking specific things like body armor, then they shouldn't tie it to greedy fleecing.

[ClassWarrior]

7. kicking because there WEREN'T two $87 billions.

:kick: