Poison the Iraq funding: Pay for it!

It's become readily apparent that we have a problem when it comes to ending the war in Iraq.  There are three key factions in Congress: the Democrats, the Republicans, and the Blue Dog Democrats.  It will take two of the three factions to pass any Iraq spending bill out of the House.  In all the discussion of the Murtha with teeth strategy, the defanged (pointless) Murtha strategy, and trying to undo the war resolution, I see no talk about what matters most of all to Republicans: money.

The Blue Dogs may be weenies when it comes to taking the keys to the army out of George W. Bush's hands, but at least they hate deficit spending.  I haven't been able to figure out if the Pay-As-You-Go rule applies to the supplementary Iraq spending, but with the Blue Dogs' help, Democrats should unite to insist that Iraq spending is paid for, rule or not.  Either it's paid for, or no money will be provided.  Inevitably, that would mean repealing tax cuts for the wealthy or big corporations.

The Iraq funding may not have teeth to make Bush do the right thing, but if it has a tax increase, it puts Bush and the Republicans in a horrible place.  If Bush were to veto the bill (or if the GOP were to stop it in the Senate), he has no war and it would be his own fault.  If Bush were to sign the bill, the GOP base would be irate.  I think if Republicans are forced to choose between war and money, they'll take the money every time.  So why aren't Nancy Pelosi and the Blue Dogs up on stage together at a news conference stating that Iraq must be paid for?

•  A reasonable proposition.

  Have you written it up and sent it to House/Senate Dems?  If not, why not?

  by Crashing Vor on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 11:40:35 AM PDT

•  I proposed this a while back

  here

  You might be interested in the discussion

  by RobLewis on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 11:51:37 AM PDT

  •  Or not.

    Just looked over CalPolJunkie's history.  A bunch of diaries that stopped election day.  Zero comments.  More of an announcer than a discusser maybe.

    by Crashing Vor on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 11:56:49 AM PDT

    •  Hover your cursor over my name

      I've been posting on this site since 2002.  Take your self-righteousness elsewhere, please.

      by CA Pol Junkie on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 01:08:35 PM PDT

    •  comment history

      Here is my comment history.  I haven't had time to participate here the last couple months, but I assure you it is not remotely limited to diaries.

      by CA Pol Junkie on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 01:19:23 PM PDT

      •  Sorry if I offended.

        I found the lack of comments curious.  Please accept my apologies.

        by Crashing Vor on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 02:03:13 PM PDT

        •  accepted

          You have to click on the "Archive" check box to see more than just the very recent stuff when searching for comments.  

          I had to do a few things after posting and when I came back, the diary had passed off the list already.  That's actually part of why I'd just been lurking here the last couple months.  DailyKos is so busy that conversations come and go too quickly.

          by CA Pol Junkie on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 02:51:55 PM PDT

          •  Thanks for the archive hint.

            And again, sorry for my misjudgement earlier.

            Is there an emoticon for a proffered hand?

            by Crashing Vor on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 03:10:18 PM PDT

            •  no emoticon...

              ... but consider your hand virtually shaken.  On reflection, my initial reaction toward you may have been disproportionate, especially since you weren't aware of the Archive trick, so for that I return the apology.

              by CA Pol Junkie on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 03:28:09 PM PDT

              •  None needed. Thanks. nt

                by Crashing Vor on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 03:32:18 PM PDT

  •  It was part of my larger proposal...

    ... here.

    But it would be a politically practical first step, IMHO.

    by tbetz on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 12:58:59 PM PDT

  •  great

    I hope the leadership will listen!

    by CA Pol Junkie on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 01:09:30 PM PDT

  •  PAYGO

    Do you have any idea as to whether PAYGO applies?  Then the rules committee could force the supplemental spending to pay for itself.

    by CA Pol Junkie on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 01:15:18 PM PDT

•  A lot of them are making money from the war

  so they are doubley happy.

  The Bush gang are taking the Social Security surplus and are paying a lot of the cost of war with that.  The more we pay in the more they spend.

  We were asked to pay that extra money in so the boomers would not be a burden to our children and grandchildren.

  When it comes time to pay back the money to the SS fund as it is needed, then it will look like granny is being greedy because the young workers are paying it and extra taxes will have to be paid to the boomer's trust fund to pay it back.  The fact that we prepaid our retirement will be ignored.  The fact they spent the money on war will be ignored, too.  The boomers did everything right, when you loan a government money, you can't tell them what to do with it, so even loaning it to them wasn't wrong, except they are doing it with no plan to pay it back.

  They are also being tight fisted with the medical care, training and treatment of our soldiers.  It is too unfair to take advantage of them and keep them in a constant civil war.  Some have died who were slated to come home, but were asked to stay 4 months longer.

  To me, democracy stands for fairness and it should begin at home.  If the Democrats don't do anything else, they should make Bush raise taxes and start banking our Social Security trust fund.  Then we will see the real cost of the war.

  by relentless on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 12:08:01 PM PDT

•  fully in agreement with this strategy

  The Dems should poison pill the Iraq funding authorization with a provision repealing the portion of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts that benefit the wealthy, and roll the taxes on nonwage income (dividends and capital gains) back to the levels they were when Clinton left office. Better still, make those taxes on nonwage income the same as taxes on equivalent wage income. Attach this as part of PAYGO.

  Make them pick between money and war. What a wedge issue.

  Further discussion of the money or war conundrum at this diary

  by NoMoreLies on Fri Mar 02, 2007 at 12:19:37 PM PDT