Why Isn't there a DNC Commercial that Asks, "Why Did Bush Threaten to VETO the $87 Billion for Our Troops?

Why didn't I know this? Read this article.

Joe Conason: 'Here's what Kerry needs to tell us'

Question: What about your vote on the $87 billion appropriation for the war? You said you voted for it before you voted against it. Weren't you having it both ways?

Kerry: You're asking all my favorite questions tonight. But I hope you will ask the President why he repeatedly threatened to veto that same $87 billion bill. I suspect most Americans still don't know about his veto threat.

He told us he would veto the $87 billion if we tried to share the burden with the Iraqis by making a loan instead of a grant. He said he would veto that bill if we allocated money to provide medical care for our veterans, and for our National Guard and Reserve families. He threatened a veto unless we agreed to add that $87 billion to the deficit, rather than reduce his most profligate tax cuts.

In the Senate, we knew that the needs of our troops would be met one way or another, but we sharply disagreed over the best way to do that. I wanted a fiscally responsible bill that provided medical care for military families. The President cared more about preserving tax cuts for those who need them least. And now we know that he has failed to spend nearly all of the $20 billion in reconstruction funding that Congress appropriated--while the costs of the war balloon toward $200 billion. The administration's incompetence is costing American and Iraqi lives.

Terry MacAuliffe, wake up & make this commercial (right after the Kristen Breitweiser commercial.)