Bush Iraq Request Includes Billions In Non-War Spending

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/10/30/b...de_n_70512.html
by Max Follmer

In a shift of strategy that indicates an increasingly weakened political position, President Bush has included at least $2.51 billion for projects unrelated to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in his latest "emergency" supplemental request.

The additional funding belies Bush's repeated calls for spending bills without assorted extras.

On Tuesday, the president criticized Democrats' for pursuing the "cynical" political strategy of tying education and health spending bills to defense and veterans funds in order to get the money past a threatened veto. Congress should pass "clean" defense spending bills, Bush insisted.

Tucked within the president's proposal are hundreds of millions of dollars for spending in countries as far-flung as Mexico, Central America, Sudan, Gaza, the West Bank, Pakistan, Djibouti and North
Korea.

Among the programs folded into the war supplemental are $500 million in assistance to Mexico to fight organized crime and narcotics trafficking, $350 million in food aid to Africa and $723 million for
peacekeeping and humanitarian aid in Darfur.


MJ:Business as usual. Rail against someone else doing exactly what you plan to do. Psychopathic republican double speak. While I fully supported juniors rhetoric of having a spending bill be about the topic at hand without add-ons, and both sides of the aisle have got this nasty habit, to rail against something while planning to do it yourself (Senator Craig, et.al.), is as immoral as it gets. Boy have I noticed the lack of republican outspokenness around here. They have all gone into their hidey-holes and hunkered down pretending not to be republicans. Contrast this with Bill Clinton. People may not have supported his blow-job but they sure didn't evaporate his support. That is, they were not ashamed of him and their own inclinations to support him. Pathetic, pathetic, pathetic.