Breaking: GOP blocks Senate vote on House anti-surge resolution

posted at 2:36 pm on February 17, 2007 by Allahpundit

60 votes were needed, only 56 were to be had. That’s six more than the Dems got two weeks ago when they tried to invoke cloture on the more complicated Warner resolution, which not only denounced the surge but demanded new policies in the region. (Well, technically, it’s seven more, but Harry Reid voted with the Republicans last time merely in order to preserve his right to call for a reconsideration). The House measure they voted on today jettisoned all the extra crap and gave them a chance to vote yes or no on the simple question of whether to oppose the “escalation.” It was the first baby step in Murtha’s slow bleed strategy, and it failed. Hard to see where they go from here, although as I’ve said before, I don’t think it’s any big loss for the left:

Is a GOP filibuster really so bad for the Democrats? They don’t want to do anything about the surge, just in case it actually works; all they want is to make a show for the cretins in their base. Forcing the Republicans to block them accomplishes that, with an added bonus of getting to point the finger afterwards at McConnell for thwarting the will of the people, obstructing the legislative process to protect the president, etc. Granted, it’s not quite as good as getting Republicans who are up for re-election to put their name to a vote supporting the war, but if you’re into meaningless symbolic gestures, you can do worse than a filibustered anti-surge resolution.

Standby for the roll. I didn’t watch the whole vote as it happened, but I watched long enough to see Norm Coleman vote yes. Captain Ed is surprised, as was I, but neither of us should have been — Coleman also voted yes on cloture re: the Warner resolution.

Update: The only Republicans to vote with the Dems last time were Coleman and Susan Collins. Joining them today: John Warner, Olympia Snowe, Arlen Specter, Chuck Hagel, and Gordon Smith. Not voting: McCain, who was out campaigning, Lisa Murkowski, Bob Bennett, Thad Cochran, Bob Corker, Kit Bond, John Ensign, Jon Kyl, Orrin Hatch, and of course Tim Johnson, who’s still recuperating from his stroke. All are Republicans except Johnson. Reid was hoping to get Lamar Alexander and Larry Craig to cross the aisle, since both are up for reelection in two years and were rumored to be wavering, but he couldn’t pull it off.

Update: Of the seven Republicans who voted for cloture, only Snowe and Specter aren’t facing reelection in 2008.

Update: McConnell’s willing to trade a non-binding expression of disapproval for a promise that they won’t cut off funds:

Republicans blasted him and the Democratic leadership for refusing to allow a vote on an alternative that ruled out any reduction in money for troops in the field.

“A vote in support of the troops that is silent on the question of funds is an attempt to have it both ways,” said Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the GOP leader. “So we are asking for an honest and open debate.”

Update: It’s a moral victory, says Reid.

“Today, a bipartisan majority of the United States Senate voted against the President’s flawed plan to escalate the war. The Senate joined the House of Representatives, put itself on the record, and told the President that America needs a new direction in Iraq. As for the Republicans who chose once again to block further debate and protect President Bush, the American people now know they support the escalation.

“Today’s vote against the escalation is not the end of this Iraq debate in the Senate. This war is too important to permit Senate Republicans to brush it aside. The Bush Administration’s failures have put our troops and America in a deep hole, and it is time for this country and this Congress to climb out. The Republican Leadership can run from this debate, but they can’t hide. The Senate will keep fighting to force President Bush to change course.”

Update: Lindsey Graham on the prospect of a vote to defund:

“If you did have this vote, the left, the radical left, would eat every Democratic presidential hopeful alive.”

“The hard left wants out of this war yesterday,’’ Graham added. “And two-thirds of this body understands the hard left is dead wrong.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Yeeeees! So much for now, for tricky Harry.

Entelechy on February 17, 2007 at 2:44 PM

The fact that it’s even come to this is heartbreaking. There are better ways to set a renewed course and strategy for Iraq.

jatfla on February 17, 2007 at 2:47 PM

Lieberman a steady class act, as always, Warner losing mind at this stage in life, Hagel/Snow, no surprise.

Coleman – will lose in 2008.

Entelechy on February 17, 2007 at 2:48 PM

^That this is coming up at all is shameful. Never before, despite other unpopular wars, has a majority of both houses of Congress sent a vote of no confidence when we had armed forces at war.
The resolution won’t pass but the message has been sent.
Unfortunately, our enemies are paying much closer attention than the American people.

billy on February 17, 2007 at 2:50 PM

There are better ways to set a renewed course and strategy for Iraq.
jatfla on February 17, 2007 at 2:47 PM

Yes, like making it into a glass parking lot….
WAR is not PC! Thats why we fell behind. Now we need to go in and kick some real butt!

lsutiger on February 17, 2007 at 2:52 PM

AP,

Your quoted analysis is on the nose. The left doesn’t dare take real action on this, so getting blocked does no harm to their cause. As you said, they can now blame the “far-right neocon chickenhawks” for any future bad news.

Of course, half a thought would remind anyone that what was “blocked” (failed to pass is more accurate) was a nothing to begin with, but posturing and having ammunition for talking points is so very much more important to the socialists than putting anything of substance on the line.

Despicable as always. Still, it isn’t bad news that the measure failed.

Freelancer on February 17, 2007 at 2:54 PM

Didn’t Reid call for a troop surge back in December?

budorob on February 17, 2007 at 2:56 PM

Didn’t Reid call for a troop surge back in December?

Hey, who told you it was ok to point out facts? Get back on today’s talking points! /sarc

Freelancer on February 17, 2007 at 2:58 PM

C’mon Larry Craig! Vote against the war, and I’ll take your seat when I move back home!!

Troy Rasmussen on February 17, 2007 at 3:29 PM

How did Senator Incitatus vote?

Limerick on February 17, 2007 at 3:42 PM

In this trickster’s mind, defeat is victory and victory is victory, so long as the U.S., more specifically President Bush, gets defeated. Media more than happy to accommodate.

Despite falling four votes short of breaking a GOP filibuster, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) claimed a symbolic victory in the fight over the Iraq War today as Democrats mustered a bipartisan majority of 56 lawmakers to support taking up a resolution opposing President Bush’s plan to increase U.S. troop levels in the war-torn country.

Entelechy on February 17, 2007 at 3:51 PM

And I have a symbolic victory gesture for Mr. Reid.

Limerick on February 17, 2007 at 3:53 PM

Forgot to say that if I had $5 for how often Mr. Schumer said:

The ideologues in the Senate want to turn what the founding fathers called the ‘cooling saucer of democracy’ into the rubber stamp of dictatorship,” said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.

…or something similar, I’d be a well-off lady. But now, anything over 50 votes in the Senate is all of a sudden a victory.

Entelechy on February 17, 2007 at 3:56 PM

Looks like Murtha has overplayed his hand. After the true purpose of his proposed legislation was leaked earlier this week by movecongress, he’s decided to admit and even
brag about it. WaPo, surprisingly but rightly slapped him down this morning.

if only he’d played the game as it was supposed to be played – measures designed ‘to improve troop readiness’, but have just the opposite effect, he could have blamed it all on bush. I can’t believe this guy was a Marine.

But the rest of the media are still attempting to play that game for him.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070217/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq

In the House, Democrats have said they will attempt to place restrictions on Bush’s request for an additional $93 billion for the military in an attempt to make it impossible for him to deploy all 21,500 additional troops.

Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., has described a series of provisions that would require the Pentagon to meet certain standards for training and equipping the troops, and for making sure they have enough time at home between deployments.

Murtha and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., describe these provisions as designed to protect the troops.

Republicans argue the effect would be to deny troops needed reinforcements and are expected to try to block the restrictions.

First of all, Murtha doesn’t describe them as trying to protect the troops. It’s to prevent the surge. He fully admits this.

Secondly, Republicans don’t argue what the effect would be, both sides are fully aware of it, and Murtha actually brags that is the desired effect. But the AP is couching this as a ‘republican argument’ instead of what everyone agrees is the truth.

Feh.

moflicky on February 17, 2007 at 4:28 PM

It’s a mistake to block the demonrats from voting on their traitorous resolution.

By all means … let them vote on it.

The Pubbies lost the last election because they betrayed their supporters by acting like … like … Pubbies!

Have faith in the common sense of the American electorate … let the rabid leftist demonrats reveal their true colors … run a presidential candidate … and Senate and House candidates … who are strong, unapologetic conservatives … and …

… voilà! … you’ll do what Reagan did … win landslide elections.

Stupid, stupid Pubbies.

Lisa Condo on February 17, 2007 at 4:29 PM

But now, anything over 50 votes in the Senate is all of a sudden a victory.

Entelechy on February 17, 2007 at 3:56 PM

The ultimate victory for Harry would be the defeat of the United States of America in Iraq. Pelosi would demand a longer limousine for a ticker-tape parade celebrating the Democrat VI Day. (Victory in Iraq)

fogw on February 17, 2007 at 4:35 PM

If we really believe the “troop surge” … a/k/a “resume kicking butt” … policy is going to work … and I strongly believe it will …

… why not allow the loony, traitorous, leftist demonrats … and the snivelling RINOs … to publicly vote … on the record … against it?

What better means can we have of defeating all of those cretins in 2008?

Once again … the Pubbies and their “leaders” are incapable of thinking clearly … but then again … they wouldn’t really be Pubbies if they could … would they?

Lisa Condo on February 17, 2007 at 4:43 PM

It’s so strange that the democrats have backed themselves in a corner and the only way to win is if al Qaeda wins.

Capitalist Infidel on February 17, 2007 at 4:47 PM

That is the point. AQ wins means Dems get the White House.

Limerick on February 17, 2007 at 4:49 PM

Lisa Condo asks: “why not allow the loony, traitorous, leftist demonrats … and the snivelling RINOs … to publicly vote … on the record … against it?”

Because passage of the measure, even “non-binding” is GIVING AID AND COMFORT TO THE ENEMY, the ones we are fighthing. It emboldens them to hang in. It tells them, that if they only hold on, AMERICA will fold.

Lisa also asks: “What better means can we have of defeating all of those cretins in 2008?”

My son is a US Marine. Is he, his fellow marines, and every soldier serving today, going to have to go in harm’s way and continue fighting an enboldened enemy OVER THERE (rather than over here) just so some RINO Republicans can save their asses in 2008?

Our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have repeatedly told us that THEY CARE about the perception that the enemy has of America’s will to fight.

They have repeatedly told us that it is IMPORTANT TO THEM that the politicans do NOT undermine them in any way.

The “vote to disapprove” of the surge is not simply a parliamentary manouver to set up for 2008. It is seen by Al Qaeda, Iran, and our enemies as proof that bin Laden was right — that America will not fight in her own defense if THEY simply stay the course. It is seen by OUR ENEMIES that they will defeat America.

The result of the Democrat’s action is predictable, should the Democrats prevail: Al Qaeda will fight even harder as a result. They WILL follow us home and strike us here. Rather than remain on the ropes in Iraq (where THEY CHOSE TO FIGHT US), they will survive and strike us here in our home.

That is why I am extremely angry at the Democratic Party. That is why I call what they are doing as TREASON. I consider it the betrayal of our military for political advantage to be the worst form of treason possible.

georgej on February 17, 2007 at 5:13 PM

Capitalist infidel writes: “It’s so strange that the democrats have backed themselves in a corner and the only way to win is if al Qaeda wins.”

No it is not.

The Democrats DO NOT WANT US TO WIN. Period. They want us to lose in Iraq and Afghanistan.

This is nothing new for them. It is EXACTLY what they did in Vietnam when in December of 1974, the voted to CUT OFF ALL MILITARY FUNDING for Vietnam, even for ammunition and spare parts for ARVN.

The America-hating leftwing took over the Democratic Party in 1972 when McGovern achieved the nomination. The nationalistic, pro-national defense Party of Wilson, FDR, Truman, and JFK *NO LONGER EXISTS* Today’s Democrats stand for ASSISTING our enemies in defeating America in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Today’s Democratic Party is the party of treason — they are willingly giving aid and comfort to Al Qaeda. And the left makes NO BONES about it.

georgej on February 17, 2007 at 5:25 PM

First of all, Murtha doesn’t describe them as trying to protect the troops. It’s to prevent the surge. He fully admits this.
moflicky on February 17, 2007 at 4:28 PM

Kinda hard for the drive-by media to tell lies when one of the nitwits involved is too stupid to play along.

91Veteran on February 17, 2007 at 5:40 PM

So the resolution is a no-go. Good, it was a stupid idea anyways.

Look for a multitude of news ‘experts’ to debate the meaning of this for months to come.

RedinBlueCounty on February 17, 2007 at 6:15 PM

This turns Murtha into nothing more than a freaking BLOWHARD! STFU

sonnyspats1 on February 17, 2007 at 7:13 PM

I’m very glad this was blocked.

And I wish congress would stop wasting time with these inane debates.

Yet, it also seems that we’re better of right now with the congress not doing anything.

Lawrence on February 17, 2007 at 8:57 PM

Blocking this vote just means that Senate Democrats will have to get by with expressing their support for the terrorists individually rather than as a group. And they will continue to do so, no matter how much damage it does to the war effort and troop morale. The Democrat Party won’t let anything stand in the way of losing at all costs.

ReubenJCogburn on February 17, 2007 at 10:03 PM

Not surprised at all by Collins.

She came to my workplace a couple of weeks ago for a tour, and talked about Iraq in a Q&A. Her mealymouthed comments then left me convinced she was going to bank hard left on this issue.

All Collins cares about is being re-elected. This move will help.

Slublog on February 17, 2007 at 10:39 PM

I agree with billy

“Unfortunately, our enemies are paying much closer attention than the American people.”

Chuck on February 17, 2007 at 10:48 PM

The key point is the McConnel quote. He would have allowed a floor vote if… the Dems would allow language that disavowed any funding cut, and they wouldn’t take the deal.
That means a cut in funding is coming. You can’t filibuster it; you can’t veto it.
Slow Bleed is the majority position in Congress.

billy on February 17, 2007 at 10:59 PM

Yet, it also seems that we’re better of right now with the congress not doing anything

.

So, lawrence, it’s better to have the Demos doing nothing in Congress rather than having the Repubs doing nothing in Congress? Maybe? I dunno………..

the Only Good Thing about the Democrats being in charge is that they have enough rope to hang themselves. Let the swinging begin…

Janos Hunyadi on February 17, 2007 at 11:09 PM

You mean there’s gridlock in the senate??? Great.

Mojave Mark on February 17, 2007 at 11:13 PM

I am sick and tired of these so call men and women in congress, WHERE are thier spines?? They don’t have the guts to even vote on an even basis of shutting off funding because they don’t have any conviction or heart to do anything but political BS. I am sorry but if they want me to get ticked off and protest my butt off in thier faces I will and I will get as many vets as I can in New England and across the country to STOP these so called wimps of the congress to get a spine once and for all.

bones47 on February 17, 2007 at 11:26 PM

Strong vote of failure issued to troops by our wussies
in the U.S. Congress.

Would be damn nice if they voted for victory.

Texyank on February 17, 2007 at 11:43 PM

Forgot to say that if I had $5 for how often Mr. Schumer said:

The ideologues in the Senate want to turn what the founding fathers called the ‘cooling saucer of democracy’ into the rubber stamp of dictatorship,” said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.
…or something similar, I’d be a well-off lady. But now, anything over 50 votes in the Senate is all of a sudden a victory.

Entelechy on February 17, 2007 at 3:56 PM

That would be fine if we were talking about a highway funding bill or an increase in some tax rate…
but to anyone working for an American defeat in Iraq like say al Quaeda or Iran you now have it on record that a majority of both houses of Congress are opposed to success in the war.
The stage has also been set for a defunding of the war.
Prepare the helicopters for the evacuation of the Green Zone.

billy on February 17, 2007 at 11:44 PM

56 was way too many votes for a POS bill.

SouthernGent on February 18, 2007 at 12:11 AM

Reed looks like the poster boy for caustic enemas.

56 times.

profitsbeard on February 18, 2007 at 12:23 AM

Heh heh heh …
http://tinyurl.com/3a9bcr

Oops?

LissaKay on February 18, 2007 at 12:59 AM

Now isn’t that the perfect face for the Dhimicrats?

R D on February 18, 2007 at 1:14 AM

The Bush Administration’s failures have put our troops and America in a deep hole, and it is time for this country and this Congress to climb out.

Forgive me, but hasn’t it been the “Left” that has tied our hands in every battle………

“Oh, no…. you can’t actually kill the enemy…….. look that soldier actually shot the enemy?, get the Inspector General….”

“You can’t fire on a Mosque… I don’t care if they are firing, and killing our troops, it’s an Ilamic religious site….. but don’t you dare mix politics and religion in the United States…”

“Beheadings?……… Beheadings?…… don’t show that…..”

“Torure at Gitmo….. TORTURE AT GITMO… AAAAHHHHHHH…”

“They don’t wear uniforms because we are the Great Satin, don’t you know that”

“Thousands of Terrorist killed…….. DON’T PRINT THAT… THEY ARE CIVILIANS….”

“Millions voted in the face of death……” “DON’T PRINT THAT…”

“Two thirds of the country working and THANK the United States………..” “DON’T PRINT THAT, DON’T PRINT THAT… YOU IDIOT….”

“The SURGE is starting to work….” “SHUT UP… SHUT UP… DON’T PRINT THAT….. ARE YOU CRAZY, DON’T PRINT THAT”

“THE UNITED STATES IS WINNING….” “These radicals need to be silenced……. right Mz. “Blinky” Pelosi, Mr. “Depends” Murtha, Mr. “Dusty” Reid????????

PinkyBigglesworth on February 18, 2007 at 1:34 AM

The “vote to disapprove” of the surge is not simply a parliamentary manouver to set up for 2008. It is seen by Al Qaeda, Iran, and our enemies as proof that bin Laden was right — that America will not fight in her own defense if THEY simply stay the course. It is seen by OUR ENEMIES that they will defeat America

.

Quite right.

The result of the Democrat’s action is predictable, should the Democrats prevail: Al Qaeda will fight even harder as a result. They WILL follow us home and strike us here. Rather than remain on the ropes in Iraq (where THEY CHOSE TO FIGHT US), they will survive and strike us here in our home.

I disagree. Why follow us home? Just leave sleeping dogs lie, an engaged America would be a threat. If al Quaeda does not attack America directly, we won’t respond. We’ll just slip into complacency, worrying about poor Britney’s hair.

My son is a US Marine. Is he, his fellow marines, and every soldier serving today, going to have to go in harm’s way and continue fighting an enboldened enemy OVER THERE (rather than over here) just so some RINO Republicans can save their asses in 2008?

God bless your son.

billy on February 18, 2007 at 1:43 AM

“If you did have this vote, the left, the radical left, would eat every Democratic presidential hopeful alive.”

I know they would try, but they would get about as far as they got with Dean and then Lamont. The nutroot left is a paper tiger, as Chairman Mao would put it.

smellthecoffee on February 18, 2007 at 2:13 AM

The result of the Democrat’s action is predictable, should the Democrats prevail: Al Qaeda will fight even harder as a result. They WILL follow us home and strike us here. Rather than remain on the ropes in Iraq (where THEY CHOSE TO FIGHT US), they will survive and strike us here in our home.

I disagree. Why follow us home? Just leave sleeping dogs lie, an engaged America would be a threat. If al Quaeda does not attack America directly, we won’t respond. We’ll just slip into complacency, worrying about poor Britney’s hair.

billy on February 18, 2007 at 1:43 AM

I don’t know if you are just a fool, an idiot, or a collaborator….

Your really do not have any idea of what is going on, do you? I hope you don’t for making a statement like that, you are in for a very big wake up call one day..

I will give you this chance,

billy on February 18, 2007 at 1:43 AM

If you really think that

Why follow us home? Just leave sleeping dogs lie,

…..

Let you post this……. “Where do you live?”

PinkyBigglesworth on February 18, 2007 at 2:32 AM

Oh dear.

Let you post this……. “Where do you live?”

PinkyBigglesworth on February 18, 2007 at 2:32 AM

Let you post this……. “Where do you live?”

PinkyBigglesworth on February 18, 2007 at 2:32 AM

When you have been threatened by a Pinkybigglesworth you must respond.
Mrs. Pinkeybigglestworryth have I offended you in some way?

Apparently I have, for you wrote:

don’t know if you are just a fool, an idiot, or a collaborator….

Mrs. Biggleworth,
Do you mind if I point something out?
The U.S Congress, both parties, have sold out 140,000 American soldiers, including georgej’s son.
They have sold out us, thet is, those of us who hope for a better future for our country.
You don’t get it do you? The Congress of the United States has done something today that no other Congress in American history has done.
And you’re mad at me.
Who’s the fool?
Really now, who is the fool?
I don’t represent you in Congress.

billy on February 18, 2007 at 3:04 AM

billy on February 18, 2007 at 3:04 AM

“billy” you answered my question in exactly the way I thought you would……. straight to the point.

“Sold out?” Yeah, you explained that, thoroughly…

Son, or Daughter, please understand, in this communication between us, you put out a point of view, others, like me, respond.

The point is, my question was rhetorical, you din’t like it……. so you responded. We can do that.

But what is happening in Congress, the majority of the troops don’t like, yet they can not respond. “UCMJ”

Billy, let me ask you this……… if you have been spending the major part of a year, away from your family, in the military because you Volunteered to something that you believed in, you have endured multiple hardships, you have gotten to know many local civilians in the battle field, you have a sense of victory, and then you find out, for political reasons only, your means to achieve victory are going to be denied to you……..

And……… if this happens, the enemy on the verge of defeat, gets a strong hold after you are forced to leave by these politicians, you have to come back in ten years because we have bombs exploding all over the world……. what responsibility will you take?

Your blog, “billy:….

PinkyBigglesworth on February 18, 2007 at 3:22 AM

BTW “billy”, asking you to post your address was, more to the point, asking you to think…. “if I take a stand, will someone notice?”…. “Like the Founding Father’s of the United Staes of America? ”

I didn’t want an answer, I just wanted you to think about it, and to the men and women who protect our country, and to the fear that when they come home, bad guys from home and abroad, might kill them in their sleep. Also know as “Sleeper Cells”…..

Oh, but you knew that…… sorry.

And no, sorry again….

“The Congress of the United States has done something today that no other Congress in American history has done.”

It didn’t quite clear the Senate did it, but you forget the Democrat actions in Congress at the end of the Viet Nam war, and the resulting Millions of murders that followed, oh, but that is just nuance ……….

Keep up with your studies, “billy”, I will always be glad to assist you……….

PinkyBigglesworth on February 18, 2007 at 3:34 AM

By the way

billy on February 18, 2007 at 3:04 AM

, if I am wrong on ANY point, I encourage you to never let me forget it, OK?

Sleep tight…….

PinkyBigglesworth on February 18, 2007 at 3:48 AM

“I disagree. Why follow us home? Just leave sleeping dogs lie, an engaged America would be a threat. If al Quaeda does not attack America directly, we won’t respond.”

Sorry, just some facts…….. this

And more facts,\………. http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/si/2005/jan/comrasJan05.pdf

and you can finish with this

PinkyBigglesworth on February 18, 2007 at 4:32 AM

Here’s the letter I wrote to Senator Smith:

Dear Senator Smith:

I’ve voted for you every time you’ve been on the ballot, but your choice to side with defeatists and vote for the Democrats’ political stunt is an embarassment to the party and an embarassment to yourself as an American. You should be ashamed. Every Republican that I know thinks you are a joke who is going to be done for in the next election. Your votes on immigration and now this terrorist-encouraging resolution have completely ruined your political future. I hope your pandering was worth it. I hope the friendly editorialis from local papers was worth it.

Sad day for you, Senator Smith. Sad, sad day for all of us. We’re just lucky there aren’t many more spineless jerks in the party like you.

Spassvogel on February 18, 2007 at 5:39 AM

Because passage of the measure, even “non-binding” is GIVING AID AND COMFORT TO THE ENEMY, the ones we are fighthing. It emboldens them to hang in. It tells them, that if they only hold on, AMERICA will fold.

georgej on February 17, 2007 at 5:13 PM

Right on the money! The conservatives are not voting politically, they are voting to protect our troops and this country. The liberals are playing politics with the troops lives and the security of this country.

I am ashamed of the american people who have been fooled by the lefts lying about the war in Iraq, and support pulling out before the mission is accomplished. I am disgusted that the conservatives have allowed the left to couch this war in their own terms. I am maddened at the traitorous liberals who put their political aspirations above the safety of this country and the lives of our troops.

THAT is why I will be at the Vietnam Veterans Mermorial in Washington D.C. on March 17th.

csdeven on February 18, 2007 at 8:25 AM

So, lawrence, it’s better to have the Demos doing nothing in Congress rather than having the Repubs doing nothing in Congress? Maybe? I dunno………..

Janos Hunyadi on February 17, 2007 at 11:09 PM

Not exactly. But the track record of the Repbulicans lately hasn’t been that great the last couple years either.

Is it better to have the Dems not doing anything stupid, or not having the GOP doing something a little less stupid. As long as neither are doing anything, then nothing stupid gets done.

But, then, nothing good is getting done either.

Lawrence on February 18, 2007 at 9:02 AM

I disagree. Why follow us home?

billy on February 18, 2007 at 1:43 AM

Billy,

I agree with most of what you have said, but I have to challenge you on this statement. I picked your remark only because I think it illustrates how complacency sneaks into the mind set of the most dedicated patriots.

On 9/11 they followed us home. They declared war on us, and our defeat in this war will not be an agreement to a cease-fire with the terrorists. Americans (even the traitorous liberals) will not disavow all the ideals that make this country what it is. It is exactly those ideals that the terrorists hate and want to destroy.

That all I wanted to say to you specifically. Thanks.

Now, my rant….

We could pull out of Iraq and save some lives, but they will still be at war with us. We can sit in our castle while they hurl stones against the gate and hope for what? That they’ll get tired and go home? Or will the cowards within our walls open the gate for them? Or will we be lulled into complacency and welcome the Trojan Horse in?

WE ARE AT WAR. But this war is not over land just yet, it’s over ideologies. And ALL WARS have to be fought and have to be won. Our enemy is relatively small and they are able to fight us in unconventional ways that makes it very hard to make progress the way we are used to making it. We are used to fighting large standing armies over huge stretches of land. Well, our enemies are not that big….YET. Make no mistake, they WANT to be a huge force to be reckoned with, and right now, we are standing in the way. If we leave Iraq, THEY WILL get the foothold they are seeking and threatening the entire middle east. Then instead of losing 3000 soldiers over the course of 4 years, we will lose 300,000 like we did during WWII.

Liberals are liberals and they look at extremists with the same arrogance as they do everyone else that is not as enlightened as they are. They think that touchy feely policies will enlighten the poor ignorant masses just like they think that the neanderthal conservatives just need to be enlightened. They do not recognized the threat for what it is. It is an old school mentality from the dark ages that understands brutality and how effective it is against liberal thinking.

The liberals would prefer to fight a traditional war because they refuse to learn from past mistakes. Conservatives are fighting this war the way we are BECAUSE we have learned the lessons of the past. We don’t want extremists to gather in strength like we did just before WWII because the loss of life is exponentially greater. Just like Hitler slaughtering millions in concentration camps, the genocide in Iraq wont stop if we quit and it wont stop if we fight on, it will only stop when we crush those who subscribe to the extremist ideals.

To sum it all up in one statement…..

Nothing will champion the ideals of extremism against civilization and swell the ranks of the terrorists, like losing the war in Iraq will. Nothing.

csdeven on February 18, 2007 at 9:45 AM

At least there are some elected officials who still have half a brain and a spine…

NRA4Freedom on February 18, 2007 at 11:05 AM

“The hard left wants out of this war yesterday,’’ Graham added. “And two-thirds of this body understands the hard left is dead wrong.”

but panders to them anyway.

One Angry Christian on February 18, 2007 at 11:10 AM

Lisa Condo asks: “why not allow the loony, traitorous, leftist demonrats … and the snivelling RINOs … to publicly vote … on the record … against it?”

Because passage of the measure, even “non-binding” is GIVING AID AND COMFORT TO THE ENEMY, the ones we are fighthing. It emboldens them to hang in. It tells them, that if they only hold on, AMERICA will fold.

Lisa also asks: “What better means can we have of defeating all of those cretins in 2008?”

My son is a US Marine. Is he, his fellow marines, and every soldier serving today, going to have to go in harm’s way and continue fighting an enboldened enemy OVER THERE (rather than over here) just so some RINO Republicans can save their asses in 2008?

You misread my post.

My goal is to defeat the RINOs as well as the demonrats. They’re included in “all those cretins.”

Passage of the resolution in the Senate … will not embolden the enemy any more than near-passage of it already has … especially since the same resolution already passed in the House.

Let’s let the traitors identify themselves beyond a shadow of a doubt … and then move in for the kill.

I hope you feel better about my post now … your family’s contribution to our freedom and safety is very much appreciated.

Lisa Condo on February 18, 2007 at 11:18 AM

Self-answering question …

Is it humanly possible for any group of alleged professionals …

… to be any more incompetent, craven, and blockheaded than today’s congressional Pubbies?

Lisa Condo on February 18, 2007 at 11:23 AM

I always knew conservatives hated America, and this proves it. They won’t allow a vote on a resolution that expresses support for the troops? They will probably try to block the resolution coming up that says that troops cannot be re-deployed without adequate armor and rest. Wouldn’t surprise me. The GOP hates our troops and they hate America. Well, at least we’re gonna get the White House back in a couple years. Then the GOP will once again be what it always should have been: irrelevant.

shackler on February 18, 2007 at 2:11 PM

“No one can defeat us unless we first defeat ourselves.”

– Dwight D. Eisenhower

Sven on February 18, 2007 at 5:32 PM

shackler on February 18, 2007 at 2:11 PM (Rusty Shackleford?)

What the Sam Hill are you talking about? It is the liberal agendas that are restricting the troops from doing their jobs: making us honor Geneva Conventions even though our enemy refuses so (and according to Geneva if our enemy doesn’t honor the rules we don’t have to either), giving us ROE’s more strict than a U.S. city cop, etc… I can tell by your tone that you are not military. Well my friend, I am, almost 9 years. And I assure it is not conservative agendas making this war harder to fight.

Who was NOT prosecuted for leaking the NSA witetaps (NOT domestic spying)? Who was NOT prosecuted for revealing that we were listening to Bin Laden’s satellite phone? Who was NOT prosecuted for leaking that we were using “borderline” interrogating tactics that was producing positive results and preventing future attacks around the world?

Answer: Not GW Bush or other Conservatives. Dee-de dee!

Who is being prosecuted for not having a good memory, just like the prosecutions’ witnesses, for revealing the ID of an un-undercover CIA agent (who was not undercover in the past 5 years) even though someone already fessed up, including her husband? Dee-de-Dee!

El Guapo on February 19, 2007 at 6:19 AM

And that vote was not a vote for support for troops. It was a vote opposing what the Demcrats were advocating from the beginning! More Troops!

the Dems called for it. The ISG called for it. The Dems called for implementation of the ISG. So when Bush finally committs more troops, which is what we need, the Democrats are agaisnt it. That is a real funny way to support your troops and their mission. Treasonists.

El Guapo on February 19, 2007 at 6:25 AM

Please, please use another picture because the first thing I always think of when I see this picture is advising this obviously big time constipated guy to eat a lot of prunes.

Sam on February 19, 2007 at 12:25 PM

Of course the conservatives aren’t being prosecuted, they are the ones in power at the Justice Dept. Dee-de-dee! You are military and you have that kind of attitude about torture? You do the uniform and this country a great disservice!!! We fight to uphold tried and true values…regardless of our enemy. When we abandon our values to “win” (whatever the hell that means), we fail in moral relevence. We become another occupier. But, since Conservatives hate America (your position on warrantless wiretapping proves that. Remeber the bill of rights? Anyone?) I suppose I am not shocked that you support this President and this war. It will have done nothing to make us more secure, and you got to watch thousands of Americans die for nothing. Keep it up bud, the V.A. thanks you.

shackler on February 19, 2007 at 12:40 PM

Oh, and about the surge. We did want more troops. We wanted enough to quell violence. We wanted the Powell Doctrine. Overwhelming force. But, as with everything he does, Bush done f***ed it up again and pussy-footed into it. 20,000 troops to secure a city the size of Baghdad? Come on! You claim to be a military man and you think this is enough troops? I sure as hell hope you are not high up in the ranks making decisions. That would be a tragedy!

shackler on February 19, 2007 at 12:52 PM