The Anchoress has an excellent post about Congress and the stalemate we are now in regarding funding our troops.

The Anchoress used to be a liberal and says she will change her registration to Independent before the next election, but she is concerned about our troops and their needs above all else. Maybe she should be in charge of Congress, as at least she is an adult.

After reading this at Blackfive, I’m beginning to think it’s time. H/T Jules.

It’s been almost 100 days since the president sent the supplemental bill to Congress, and these “we support the troops” types are so busy playing political games, they’re starting to impact the safety of the troops…these are the same people, btw, who were carrying on about how “nothing is more important than the safety of the troops and that they have everything they need.”

Well…they’re reaching danger point. The troops should not have to scrounge because the Democrats are playing political theater.

Is it time for War Bonds? I’ll buy.

Democrats: You’re bringing yourselves to a place I don’t think you want to go - where you’ll be accountable for troop deaths, beyond your original vote to war - you’ll be accountable for NOT TAKING CARE OF THE TROOPS.

Now, just to be fair I’m going to quote the first post on her comments board and her response:

Gotta say, this whole business of castigating Democrats for “screwing the troops” is getting a little ridiculous. These and other refrains from the cheerleaders of this war are getting very tiresome, because it neglects one salient point. The Congress sent President Bush all the money he needs to fund the troops. Instead of writing a blank check for an administration who has proven that it cannot manage this war effectively, they demanded sign of progress and yes, a timeline. It was President Bush who effectively didn’t support the troops with his veto. When more than 60% of Americans want a timeline and when the Iraqi Parliament itself wants a timeline, it gets kind of hard to blame the Democrats for not wanting to support the troops. They are representing the wishes of the majority of their constituents, not the 28% who still cling to the “Commander guy” and his inept administration. And it’s interesting that you keep using the phrase “adult” as if it’s the Democrats who mismanaged the Iraq quagmire. Sorry, the old refrain that all the hippies are traitors is not resonating like it used to.

Comment by Kougar ? May 12, 2007 @ 10:10 am

——————————————————————————–

Oh come on, now, Kougar, the congress loaded that bill up with so much pork, it was a joke, and everyone knew it was a joke. And as to a timeline, it doesn’t really matter if 60% (your figure, polls are meaningless to me because I know how easily they are manipulated) of the people “want a timeline” that doesn’t mean a timeline is right or sensible. A “timeline” does nothing but tell the enemy to check their calendars for the date they can unleash hell.
‘
Thinking still trumps polling, every time!
‘
Signs of progress and benchmarks are reasonable. TIMELINES are just stupid. The stupidest way to fight any war.
‘
But progress and benchmarks cannot be fairly assessed if the troops are scrounging. So, I’m all for progress and benchmarks…but the congress has to be fair about giving the troops what they need while we’re watching the progress and marking the benchmarks.
‘
And I’m not just picking on the Dems, here. I’d be happy to yell at the GOP for screwing the troops, too…just as soon as they start. Until - ALL of these people voted the troops into harms way. They have to take care of them now. It’s really that simple.

Comment by TheAnchoress ? May 12, 2007 @ 10:35 am

As long as this doesn’t require Congressional approval and can be done without them I’ll gladly buy war bonds even if they don’t have a return.

I can remember having a stamp book for war bonds when I was in grade school. Maybe they were called savings bonds then, but either way, if it gets our troops the equipment and hot food they need at the end of a long day I’ll pitch in.