John McCain

The terms of the settlement require that Congress approve it before the end of this month.

Members of Congress going to jail, corruption of the appropriations process.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It has been very helpful.

And the last effort did not meet that constitutional requirement because?

Most of it was not for purposes of reducing spending. It was for moving money around for different priorities.

The budget does not decrease overall, and the spending does not decrease overall.

Whenever someone proposes giving the President this kind of line-item veto authority, the examples they give are like money for a mule museum in Bishop, California, or funds to refurbish the statue of Vulcan in Birmingham, Alabama.

The absence of any provision in the CWA that obligates Congress to approve a separate Act to declare what it has already declared in a free-standing public law.

General McChrystal, please explain why your new strategy and the many additional troops you will receive can bring success in Afghanistan when past efforts have not fully done so?

General McChrystal, does the current plan for the surge of forces ensure that arriving units will have all the vehicles, such as Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles and equipment they need for missions in high altitude and rugged…

Amateurs talk about tactics, but professionals study logistics.

General McChrystal, on the specific issue of rotary wing assets which seem to be a high demand asset for both U.S. and coalition forces, the Army's OH-58D Kiowa Warriors have only limited lift capability in Afghanistan's thin air.

General McChrystal, how do you plan to mitigate these risks?

General McChrystal, if the Services are delayed in flowing the resources you have requested, do you feel you have the flexibility to ask for extra time before conducting a formal review of the benchmarks and indicators?

General McChrystal, what risks and challenges are inherent in an accelerated deployment schedule?

General McChrystal, what will need to be done to ensure we can adequately resupply 100,000 U.S. troops in a country with extremely limited infrastructure and limited routes into the country?

I agree with the Secretary's statement. We are in it to win.

It is obvious from your experience in Afghanistan that the Afghan people do not want the return of the Taliban.

We are in this thing to win.

Setting the July 2011 date to begin reductions of our forces is a reasonable way to impart to the Government of Afghanistan a sense of focus and urgency.

The presidential election was riddled with fraud and that the turnout was much lower than expected because of intimidation by the Taliban.

It doesn't matter whether we call it a cliff or a ramp or anything else. It's still an exit sign.

I have yet to see a comprehensive, cohesive, convincing plan to implement the essential civil side of any successful surge.

I think the American people need to know whether we will begin withdrawing in 2011 and conditions are ripe for that, or whether we will just be withdrawing, no matter what.

If you take only one thing back with you to our fellow citizens in Afghanistan, let it be this: America and this Congress are fully behind them.