It may surprise you to know I actually read the link you provided. Your overstatement, while not unexpected -- having read a few of your posts by now -- is at best a careless reading, is likely a reflection of your inablility to assimilate words, and at worst is a sad attempt to distort. When it's the Iraq war, of course, it's hard to argue in its favor without distorting or ignoring facts. So you're in good shape, in that reagard. The only way to conclude from the article cited that all 73 would immediately cut all funding is to be refractory to input. Like our president.

Democrat,

1) Please tell me, with links, where you find I have made overstatements in my posts.

2) Congress' plenary power lies in its spending ability. Constitutionally speaking, that's how they can best stop the war, especially considering that spending requires affirmation, and by merely not voting they can end it without a veto.

3) When you have the balls to give a name and a real email I'll take your seriously, until then your petty name-calling only serves to illustrate your lack of a real argument.