White House Wins On War, IMF Funds

As the clock began to count down the minutes that members of the House had to cast their vote on a war-funding bill topping $100 billion, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) waded into enemy territory.

The anti-war Democrat, who'd been whipping hard against the measure, stood behind a klatch of Republicans, watching the GOP computer and taking notes. It's not often that Kucinich and House Republicans find themselves on the same side. But the GOPers were determined to oppose what they call a bailout for foreign banks, and antiwar Democrats hoped to ally with them to block funding for wars they've long opposed in Iraq and Afghanistan.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), meanwhile, hovered by the front desk, beaming. As the 15-minute vote wound down to zero, she was still far from the 218 she needed for passage, but she showed no sign of concern. The vote was held open as enough Democrats stepped forward to vote for the war money.

Fifty-one Democrats opposed the war funds the last time it came before the House. There was little pressure on them one way or the other. But when the Senate added the line of credit for the IMF and Republicans announced opposition, votes that had previously been worthless took on heightened value. The White House and Democratic leadership went into high gear, threatening and offering deals in exchange for a yes vote. This time around, 32 Democrats stayed as no votes.

Democrats who switched tapped Pelosi on the shoulder before walking back to their seats, swapping smiles, as Pelosi studied the lit-up board on the wall that displays the votes.

The tally hit 218, but Democrats seemed not to notice. When Pelosi looked up and saw it reading 220, she left the well of the floor and found Rep. Dave Obey (D-Wisc.), the Appropriations Committee Chairman, in his seat. The two shared a congratulatory handshake.

The vote was gaveled to a close, with five Republicans joining 221 Democrats. Pelosi turned her gaze back to the board, studying her members' votes.

She was no doubt pleased to see that these names sported a green box next to them this time, reversals from their previous no votes...

Clarke
Cohen
Cooper
Costello
Frank
Gutierrez
Inslee
Kagen
Markey (Mass.)
Matsui
McDermott
George Miller
Napolitano
Neal (Mass.)
Oberstar
Schakowsky
Thompson (Calif.)
Towns
Velazquez
Weiner

And those who stuck with their no votes...

Baldwin
Capuano
Conyers
Doggett
Edwards (Md.)
Ellison
Farr
Filner
Grayson
Grijalva
Honda
Kaptur
Kucinich
Lee (Calif.)
Lofgren
Massa
McGovern
Michaud
Payne
Pingree
Polis
Serrano
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Speier
Stark
Tierney
Tsongas
Waters
Watson
Welch
Woolsey

My book, This Is Your Country On Drugs: The Secret History of Getting High in America, is now out

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[JackNasty]

Obama declares another victory over his own campaign promises. Once again Obama has betrayed voters.

Dennis Kucinich 1012.

[Dustee]

Yes, most republicans and tr0//s have been saying that since 01/20/09. Five months in office and Obama hasn't saved or helped the country and the world yet. What's wrong with him?

[IntelligenceQuantifier]

Exactly, Dennis Kucinich has a better chance of winning in 1012, than he would in 2012.

[JackNasty]

Whoops. I haven't had my morning coffee. Heh!

[norkas]

We have NO choice but to fund out troops in Iraq and those who do not get it are fools.

We pull out now and just stop watch the country implode fast, Yes we will be out sooner then later but being careful is most importent now.

Cheny, Bush promoted this hell and caused us so much grief prmoting lies to make this war that it cost over 2000 lives lost and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, lives lost.

I am a bifg supporter of Barak Obama and agree with a very careful pull out that does not cause the Country to implode again and that will happen every fast now because Iran is a major trouble maker in the violance in Iraq and that is quickly ending because of Obama diplomatic and brillant our reach to Iraqi leaders.

Dennis Kunichi is wrong big time and when a politician or anyone sees the shoe does not fit they must adjust Dennis never does and that is what i call dangerous , imature, stubborn.

[Pleneras]

You have to fund the military or else how can they stay there until it's time to leave? What will they have for protection? Any politician republican or dem cannot deny bullets, vests, battle gear, food, shelter, salary, medical aid, etc. for the men and women who are already there. That's unpatriotic and a signal they are against our military's protection! HOW DARE THEY VOTE AGAINST OUR MILITARY!

[RoloTomassi]

Your comment is absurd; first, defeating this funding bill would cause no crisis fo rour troops--such is tired GOP-blather that Obama loyalists like you adopt in an utterly clueless manner. Secondly, the most significant issue in the passing of this bill is NOT funding the troops, but the IMF appropriation.

Another run at the bill sans the IMF funding could have passed quite easily, but thanks to sycophants like you the truly important point of opposing the bill is lost amid blind patriotic hoopla about funding troops.

[RRoadrunner]

If Kucinich was ok with it then all is good. The man has morals

[JackNasty]

Dennis Kucinich stuck to his no vote.

[RRoadrunner]

ooops my bad...thank's for the correction!

[t iessa]

Which is why he can't win a national election.

[LemonMeringue]

And that is exactly what we need to change about our political system.

End the PACs and lobbyists.

A representative government (it's not a democracy) that represents the people, not the corporations.

And media not run by political hacks.

[TN60]

Seems to me that a President who keeps racking up legislative wins, one after another, doesn't need to "grow a pair", as some so arfully put it......but already has "big enough ones' !!!

[scalle]

To all the liberal, left leaning, progressive whatever you are called nay syers, TAKE A BREATH. As a life long progressive, all you guys make me choke, relax give him a chance, be realistic this guy is very smart, savy and smooth. Back off on the critisim and threats of not supporting the dems, I know you may not be happy now but I GUARANTEE you, President Gingrich or Romney or Palin won't make you happy in 2012. CALM DOWN .

[Dustee]

President Obama 'grandmother' once said of him that Obama usually can see the whole picture of an issue while others see it in bits and pieces like a puzzle. In other words, he can see the end results.

[Gretel1or2]

Well, some people seem to think that a president's term is now six months and not four years.

[sandals]

Ok here we go again I believe it will be by Aug. 31, 2010, isn't that fast enough some of you are so flipping ridiculous, no wonder so many people leave the Democratic Party, it is people like you if this President could get them all out tomorrow that still wouldn't be fast enough for some of you.
I am against this was as much as anybody, but this will take time calling the President names gets you where?

[Pleneras]

it's republicans who are making those comments passing themselves off as dems. They are trying to give the perception dems are upset at our president. They get paid to do this stuff by the swift boat people and many lizard brains donate their time to flood liberal website with LIES.

[graceland9]

Thank you. That was my theory too.

[scooperss]

Really? You read everyone's profile and know that?

[SangZe]

Obama = liar.

[Gatorray11]

Why? You thought he could walk in on January 20 and withdraw over 150,000 troops on Jan. 21.

Some of my brothers on the left wing of our party have unrealistic expectations. Barack Obama always talked about withdrawing troops in 16 months. He is moving a little slower, but he is moving toward an end.

And this is the last supplemental bill. George II did that to hide the cost of a war his administration said would be paid with Iraqi oil revenue. So far they have only been off by a trillion. Like everything else about this war, they lied.And don't forget they had the tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans to protect. Obama is letting them expire.

So now you expect Obama to straighten everything out in the five months he has been in office? Grow up and concentrate on helping him pass a healthcare measure with a public option. When Al Franken is seated soon we will have 60 Senators. We just need to pressure the few Democrats who are sitting on the fence this is a Democratic signature issue and if you don't go along don't expect help when you run for re-election. In fac, expect a well financed Democratic progressive in your primary.

[Dupree]

Thank you for your mature and insightful post. I never realized how foolish some Americans are. They actually expected Obama to literally walk on water and part the Red Sea...sorry...he is NOT the Messiah. That role is reserved for Christ alone. He is simply a man that seems to be decent although not perfect. He has the responsibility to govern in a responsible manner and that would include the implementation of executing the order to withdrawal troops in a responsible manner that does not incur the dismantling of all that has been achieived there in spite of our unjust invasion to that region of the world. It is as if people are unable to comprehend that it is one thing to run for office and another to execute that office. The job requires far more due diligence and oversight that the candidate perhaps were not aware of as they are not privilege to all the information or direct consult with the military and other officials that will aid in shaping their decision and since neither we have that perspective...it may seem real simple to some..just pull them out. It is the same simple mindset that led us into invade the country thinking we will be perceived as "liberators." It was complicated then and it is complicated now.

[RhodaA]

Exactly right. Thank you for saying this out loud !

[mcantwell]

Good on You!

[VeggieVeal]

Right on the money!

[TN60]

That's what most of the people don't understand or care to understand...

Bush and his Republican sycophants­/enablers/­military complex/Halliburton contractors.... hid the cost of the Iraq War by keeping OFF THE BOOKS, his spending for the war.

Let me repeat that....

.His budget DID NOT include the spending for the Iraq War. He lied to start the war, he lied about the costs , he never cared what it would cost to rebuild the army and equipment used in Iraq and the new President has to clean up all his messes.....Got It?????

[confidance government]

I think this is telling us that we need to be much much more involved in the nomination process for presidential candidates. Frankly, with the DNC and RNC nominee debates you could tell that they were just handing out the nomination to the biggest crowd pleaser and never asked any concrete questions concerning policy.

We also have to be ready to call for impeachment of Senators, Representatives, and even Presidents if they demonstrate such dishonesty.

[nellie]

huh?

[golferman]

say again?

[mcantwell]

You sound like right-wingnut.

[confidance government]

For demanding accountability? For being incensed at the dishonesty politicians demonstrate with their campaign promises and expressing a desire to hold them accountable? I had no idea that these traits were the hallmarks of right-wing nuttery.

[Pleneras]

Sounds like an involved and informed citizen.

[scooperss]

People only believe what the media tells them when it suits their own purposes. Otherwise,to them, it's all biased.

[Truthahn]

Anyone remember this gem from the Obama campaign website:

"Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al-Qaida attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al-Qaida."
-----------
Based on that, shouldn't we already have between 5 and 10 combat brigades out since Obama took office? And what up with the 50,000 strong "residual force?" He gave the impression the residual force would just be big enough "to protect our embassy and diplomats." 50,000 troops is a heck of a lot of protection for an embassy. It's more that one third of what out troop strength was at peak levels.

[confidance government]

You have to understand the difference between pre-election v. post-election. You have to make promises that you have no intention of fulfilling (lie) to get elected, however, once you are elected there is no consequences of those lies because the general public is normally too fat, happy, and stupid to do anything about it.

[Dupree]

There is a big difference between a candidate running for office and the role of President actually responsible for governing the nation. We made a legal binding deal with Iraq and they set the time for complete withdrawal. He also have to weigh the decision as to the best method of achieving these goals. YOU would prefer to have him return all the soldiers home on January 20, 2009 without any thought to the carelessness or carefulness of the process. But as any good and wise President he has to weigh the information that is giving to him by the military. He has to filter their "expertise" advice into the equation of reaching a decision on how to implement this. And as far as Afghanistan is concern.....if people were paying attention during the campaign....he always stated that the real war was in this region and that the death of 3000 of our citizens have yet been vindicated. In case you have not noticed...every couple of years...the "wanna be Hollywood star" Osama Bin Laden...continues to send us footage of his "reality" show and it is a reminder that the true culprit did in fact get away with the murder of our fellow citizens.

[YewNeekId]

Sure - it's a lot like the difference between and honest man and a lying dog

[Dupree]

Is is possible that the perspective of a candidate is limited to the scope and leverage of the reality on the ground. Can we at least acknowledge that the President is privilege to more information that a candidate Obama would not have at his disposal? Is it possible to acknowledge that life is complicated and that there are complexities that must be weighed in the equation before one can reasonably and responsibly act? Or is ending a war that lasted eight years real simple to you ...who is not ultimately responsible for the aftermath that could occur if it is not done correctly. I am watching and observing the process and when the time comes and the agreement that was outlined by the Iraqies just before Bush left office...is not followed, then I will add my voice to the dissent. Wait, Watch and Witness.

[BeFairNow]

Thank you Dupree for injecting a much-needed dose of sense and pragmatism. I would have said this but sometimes I get so darned tired of having to point out the ridiculousness of the McDonaldized thinking processes that a lot of people have - decisions must be arrived at in 5 minutes or less because that is the attention span of a frighteningly large percentage of the population. Of course, 5 minutes does not allow for the uncovering or analysis of the types of data that are most useful to consider before making a decision, or to sufficiently observe how an entity operates (President Obama) to make any reasonable judgement about its abilities or intentions. 11% of Americans still think our President is a Muslim and I'm willing to bet good money that for a proportion of this figure, it's probably because it would take more than 5 minutes for them to properly examine the evidence proving he isn't. The rest are just different degrees of stupid. Enough said.

[mcantwell]

There is this little thing that was put into place by the Iraq government late last year. It's called the SOFA AGREEMENT and the U.S. has to abide by it...period.

[confidance government]

So it appears that war without end is the new strategy in Afghanistan. Not to mention the caveats buried in SOFA.

New boss, same as old boss.

Does anyone here think that we can win in Afghanistan without dramatically increasing our troop commitment thereby requiring conscription?

My hats off to the Dems that stuck with their "no" votes, these are the sort of people with principles that need to remain in Washington.

[lady49]

Well Ryan,
Seems like your "fishing in the dark" strategy paid off. You found all the "creepy-crawlers".
Since you had to do a RETRACTION of your last Woosley "I was threatened"- when the truth was she was never "threatened at all"- SHe "HEARD" that others were threatened.
If was really not good journalsim to repeat something you know is inaccurate.

Careful, Ryan your "slip" is showing!

[Paladin2]

I often wonder just what the 'New Democratic Party' read; right of center DLC Republican lite party have to do to drive true Democrats from their grasp? From the same old same old of Mr. Changes financial flim flam to the endless war and still the same global financial and military hegemony 'foreign policy' do it our way or die at the cost to the taxpayer of a trillion dollars a year or so. When will Democrats face the fact that the positions and policies of both parties differ so little that only a name differentiates them? Democrats are more 'concerned with the common person'? Not by their actions and deeds they're not and they hardly feel the need to hide it any longer. It took me all of an hour to compare the candidate "Mr. Change" with the person of Mr. Obama and see through the scam. "Waste" my vote? No I didn't. I voted for a candidate who deserved the job. When true Democrats abandon the neo con DLC same as the GOP corrupt monster the party's become their will be no change. In his short time in office and by his appointments alone Mr. Change is making an effective argument for me.

[evekendall]

"The US Has 761 Military Bases Across the Planet, and We Simply Never Talk About It"

That's 761 active bases in other countries, not including the bases on American soil. There are only about 94 countries on the planet. It's easy to do the math on this one: on average, about 8 US military bases in every country on the face of the earth. Sounds like we think we own the world.

http://www.alternet.org/world/97913/the_us_has_761_military_bases_across_the_planet,_and_we_simply_never_talk_about_it/

[coultersnemesis]

or..another angle would be to assume that other countries want us there to protect them ..but then they are just using us ...because we spend our money to keep up these bases and this money goes to the military-industrial complex (private corps) and the war machine profits at the expense of the American people. These countries shouldn't assume we will remain a benevolent hegemony forever--power corrupts.

[cdub1991]

192-195 countries, depending on which you want to count and a third of the bases are in the Northwest Pacific, but the point is valid. With our ability to project power, it isn't even clear why that many would be considered necessary even if we did own the world.

[evekendall]

Thanks for doing my proofreading. My mistake. I meant to say about 194 countries, so my math is wrong... but the point remains the same.

[dagmaclugh39]

Seems to me the way to end a war is to stop fighting. But I guess that's too simple, huh?

[Stilts9]

Blackwater employees will sleep a little easier tonight.

http://rebelreports.com/

[Seattlelite]

Interesting, when the dem's wanted to cut funding to force Bush to end the invasion of Iraq the re-thungs claimed the dem's didn't support the troops. Now that they're out of power they're all about cutting funding. Took a ton of money to make this mess and it's going to take a ton to clean it up.

[coultersnemesis]

then the money should be appropriated via a 'peacekeeping, civilian, and education and infrastructure funds for countries we invaded' bill. NOT A WAR FUNDING BILL!!!

[kewe]

you should actually read - or even scan through - the actual document. it has hundreds of millions of dollars allocated to just that. 'war funding' is an easy headline

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-2346

[the964kid]

good point.

[nellie]

Excellent post.