The Cafferty File: War Spending



On "The Situation Room" today, we asked viewers the following questions, and here are some of our favorite responses that we didn't get to read on air:

Should Congress approve an additional $160 billion supplemental appropriation for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?

No. The amount of money wasted by the incompetent running of this war has already been too much. It's time for Congress to stop the rubber-stamp drain. Not another dollar until we can have investigations into the missing weapons, the undone rebuilding and why the Iraqi oil is not being used to pay for this war. The war is already lost, no amount of money could buy victory now, it would only prolong the time until we finally surrender to the inevitable.
Anonymous

Why not insist that if Congress approves any additional expenditure of tax dollars in Iraq, that doing so be based upon the Iraq Government agreeing, and accepting that any such U.S. expenditures constitute a loan which their government must pay back. The U.S. could defer the payments for ten years.
David, Sartell, Minnesota

We do not have a choice. We were the ones that created the chaos that exists in both countries, and both are disasters. We should clean it up, as much as I hate to do it.
Allen, Cameron Park, California

I think both parties are forced to because otherwise they are accused of "not supporting the troops".
W.B., Las Vegas, Nevada


Was it a mistake for Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-California, to say impeachment is "off the table"?

I do not think it was a mistake to take impeachment off the table. If the investigations show that President Bush has committed serious crimes against our country, we the people will demand that he be impeached. Congress should not want to be elected just to impeach a president.
LaVon, Bedford, Texas

Yes. She should be keeping all options open. I'm sure it would be divisive to have an impeachment but evidence will show that is the proper response to this misguided war
Joanne, Atlanta, Georgia

Jack, of course it was not a mistake, our new leader of the House Nancy Pelosi knew what she said, yes impeachment is off the table for now. But we can reset the table any time we want to!
Dane, Anaheim Hills, Calif.

I think it's a smart move for her to take impeachment off the table. It gives her space to work with the president on getting some legislative points on the board for her party...while at the same time letting Waxman go to work on his investigations. Depending on what Waxman finds, she can always come back and open the door with a well-timed, "We didn't have any idea about how bad these scandals actually were..."
Eric, Washington, D.C.

Will identifying sponsors of congressional earmarks curb spending?

The only way to curb earmarks is to pass legislation that makes it mandatory that these items be addressed individually in open sessions of the legislature and that they must be voted on, along with the other issues addressed in the bill to which they are attached.
Johnnie, Carthage, Texas

They say sunlight is the best disinfectant, so maybe having to attach names to earmarks will help curb spending but I'm very pessimistic.
Jacquelyn, Chicago, Illinois

The word of the era is: Transparency. It would be pretty hard to pull off the earmark shenanigans that Republicans have been so successful at, if every single dollar within every single appropriation was documented for the public to evaluate on its merits.
Arleen, Fort Collins, Colo.

I resent the question. I work forty plus hours a week. I am expected to act openly and honestly in my position. For God's sake, why can't our leaders just do the same without us acting as their parent?
Mike, St. Paul, Minnesota