This man is truly disgusting!

[Scott & Lai 12]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/10/18/...in3381751.shtml

Republicans Object To Stark Comments On War

By Josephine Hearn

Oct 18, 2007

(The Politico) House Republicans objected today to comments made by outspoken liberal Democratic Rep. Pete Stark of California on the Iraq war during debate on the override of President Bush's veto of the children's health program.

Speaking on the House floor, Stark said, "Under the Republican plan, by 2017, we probably will have killed 20,000 soldiers in Iraq, spending

$200 billion."

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) rose to protest the remark and asked that Stark's words be taken down, a formal procedure to punish a member of Congress for breaching the House's standards of decorum.

The chair later ruled that Stark's comment did not refer to any specific House member and thus were appropriate.

Earlier in the SCHIP debate, Stark had made other spirited remarks.

“You don't have money to fund the war or children,'' he said. "But you're going to spend it to blow up innocent people if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the president's amusement."

Responding promptly and harshly to Stark, the National Republican Congressional Committee declared he had "trampled on the sacrifice of our troops."

Completely out of line behaviour for a member of Congress

[William33 110]

I disagree Scott, because somebody needs to bring the "grim outlook" of the Iraq debacle to the forefront.

With all due respect to our troops, how many more do we need to sacrifice for a situation that will never be resolved?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Responding promptly and harshly to Stark, the National Republican Congressional Committee declared he had "trampled on the sacrifice of our troops."

Yeah - like that wasn't predictable.

As with that Rush thing is this really a newsworthy story? Did the VP tell someone to go *uck themselves a little while back. Blustery rhetoric is par for the course - seems a little strange to get bent out of shape about something like this.

He calls them baby killers, they call him a traitor. All as bad as each other IMO.

Edited October 19, 2007 by Number 6

[Scott & Lai 12]

I disagree Scott, because somebody needs to bring the "grim outlook" of the Iraq debacle to the forefront.

With all due respect to our troops, how many more do we need to sacrifice for a situation that will never be resolved?

So you think it is appropriate for a member of Congress to claim that the President gets amusement from the death of our soldiers?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

With all due respect to our troops, how many more do we need to sacrifice for a situation that will never be resolved?

Agreed. We need to be able to say that the President's "strategery" has thus far not yielded anything but more American deaths than 9/11, a hell of a lot more severely injured, a recruiting stream for terrorists like they could not ever have dreamed of and a crucial region of the world destabilized and more dangerous than ever. How much more of this idiotic nonsense are we willing to stand by and endure? How many more young men and women are we willing to let Bush put on that altar of his own fcuking ego?

ETA: The one truly disgusting is that commander guy.

Edited October 19, 2007 by Mr. Big Dog

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I disagree Scott, because somebody needs to bring the "grim outlook" of the Iraq debacle to the forefront.

With all due respect to our troops, how many more do we need to sacrifice for a situation that will never be resolved?

So you think it is appropriate for a member of Congress to claim that the President gets amusement from the death of our soldiers?

I think there are bigger issues at stake than merely how one guy happens to frame the issues. Iraq is a mess, healthcare is a mess - noone does anything of note about either of these two things except get offended by the words used to describe it.

Real productive. How's about they all get on with their jobs rather than jerking each other off about their presentation.

[William33 110]

I disagree Scott, because somebody needs to bring the "grim outlook" of the Iraq debacle to the forefront.

With all due respect to our troops, how many more do we need to sacrifice for a situation that will never be resolved?

So you think it is appropriate for a member of Congress to claim that the President gets amusement from the death of our soldiers?

Absolutely not. However, the other points are spot on, short of the President piece. As a member of Congress, he could have chosen better wording. My point: We need to quickly stabilize the Iraqi Government and get out.

Edited October 19, 2007 by William33