What pisses me off is this answer:
``We need to bring this war to an end...but we need to do it in a way that makes our troops safe.''
Well, duh! The assumption is that cutting off money puts the troops in harm's way. Well, only if the president refuses to bring them home and then keeps them in combat. So, whose fault is it in that case, if we take causalities? The implicit answer, that would Congress because they cut off the funds, doesn't hold up. They cut the funds because they wanted the troops withdrawn. If the President keeps them installed, then its his responsibility to keep them safe.
CG