Disgrace: Hillary, Reid, 23 other Democrats vote against resolution expressing support for Petraeus

posted at 1:48 pm on September 20, 2007 by Allahpundit

They own you now, Glacier. The text of the amendment:

SEC. 1070. SENSE OF SENATE ON GENERAL DAVID PETRAEUS.

(a) Findings.–The Senate makes the following findings:

(1) The Senate unanimously confirmed General David H. Petraeus as Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq, by a vote of 81-0 on January 26, 2007.

(2) General Petraeus graduated first in his class at the United States Army Command and General Staff College.

(3) General Petraeus earned Masters of Public Administration and Doctoral degrees in international relations from Princeton University.

(4) General Petraeus has served multiple combat tours in Iraq, including command of the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) during combat operations throughout the first year of Operation Iraqi Freedom, which tours included both major combat operations and subsequent stability and support operations.

(5) General Petraeus supervised the development and crafting of the United States Army and Marine Corps counterinsurgency manual based in large measure on his combat experience in Iraq, scholarly study, and other professional experiences.

(6) General Petraeus has taken a solemn oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

(7) During his 35-year career, General Petraeus has amassed a distinguished and unvarnished record of military service to the United States as recognized by his receipt of a Defense Distinguished Service Medal, two Distinguished Service Medals, two Defense Superior Service Medals, four Legions of Merit, the Bronze Star Medal for valor, the State Department Superior Honor Award, the NATO Meritorious Service Medal, and other awards and medals.

(8) A recent attack through a full-page advertisement in the New York Times by the liberal activist group, Moveon.org, impugns the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all the members of the United States Armed Forces.

(b) Sense of Senate.–It is the sense of the Senate–

(1) to reaffirm its support for all the men and women of the United States Armed Forces, including General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq;

(2) to strongly condemn any effort to attack the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all the members of the United States Armed Forces; and

(3) to specifically repudiate the unwarranted personal attack on General Petraeus by the liberal activist group Moveon.org.

And the roll. Amazing.

petraeus-roll.png

Update (BP): From the Romney campaign:

Today, Governor Mitt Romney issued the following statement on the Senate’s vote to condemn the MoveOn.org ad:

“Hillary Clinton had a choice. She could stand with our troop commander in Iraq, or she could stand with the libelous left wing of her party. She chose the latter. The idea that she would be a credible commander-in-chief of our armed forces requires the willing suspension of disbelief.”

Hillary does realize that the job she’s applying for is Commander in Chief, right?


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

Comment pages: 1 2

Oh WOW!!!! Mitt just 8itch slapped her a$$!!!

More interesting is the absence of “The magic negro’s” vote and the amount of dems that voted in favor of it. And by my count, 22 more dem targets for moveon.org to start lobbying against.

csdeven on September 20, 2007 at 3:56 PM

Well played by Cornyn and the Republicans. Now the troops know exactly who supports them and who doesn’t, and a lot of us have long memories. It’ll be fun to watch all the blue-on-blue bloodshed over this.

ReubenJCogburn on September 20, 2007 at 3:57 PM

I fired off emails to both Hillary and Chuckie-boy, my senators (woe is me, I never voted for either of them).

I thanked them for denigrating the service of the good general, and for also including in that denigration the service of my son and of every other parent’s military son or daughter.

I asked her HIllaryness how she could even begin to fantasize about being Commander in Chief and caring about our security AND our troops with such despicable behavior.

I told Chuck that his political posturing is out there for the whole world to see.

And I also wondered if their vocabulary or emotional range included shame.

Mommynator on September 20, 2007 at 3:58 PM

Hey Mommynator – I’m ashamed to be from Illinois too…

moc23 on September 20, 2007 at 4:02 PM

I think this whole thing is the best thing that could have happened for us. MoveOn has been dragged out of the shadows, and Hillary has been forced to make a choice.

And we can make her pay dearly with moderate voters for it.

Kudos to Mitt for firing the first shot. And what a shot it was.

Hawkins1701 on September 20, 2007 at 4:03 PM

We can’t be that stupid, can we??

deedledee on September 20, 2007 at 3:26 PM

Yes, we can. We elected her husband twice, didn’t we?

jdawg on September 20, 2007 at 4:04 PM

Romney:

Hillary Clinton had a choice. She could stand with our troop commander in Iraq, or she could stand with the libelous left wing of her party. She chose the latter. The idea that she would be a credible commander-in-chief of our armed forces requires the willing suspension of disbelief.

Topsecretk9 on September 20, 2007 at 4:07 PM

Hey Mommynator – I’m ashamed to be from Illinois too…

My sympathies, dear.

Mommynator on September 20, 2007 at 4:11 PM

Allah P
Unvarnished? Shouldn’t that be untarnished?

leepro on September 20, 2007 at 2:42 PM

Unvarnished:
1.plain; clear; straightforward; without vagueness or subterfuge; frank: the unvarnished truth.

csdeven on September 20, 2007 at 4:12 PM

It’s only a state because 50 is a nice round number.

Zach on September 20, 2007 at 3:54 PM

There are conservatives here. Minority we are, when compared to the ex-California and Washington State haoles.

Remember, it takes three lefts to make a right.

Kini on September 20, 2007 at 4:15 PM

Not defending the Hillary, et al, or the underlying sentiment, but would any of you have voted for something that said…

(8) A recent attack through a full-page advertisement in the New York Times by the neocon activist group, Hotair.com, impugns the honor and integrity of [WHOEVER] and all the members of the [WHATEVER]

(3) to specifically repudiate the unwarranted personal attack on [WHOEVER] by the neocon activist group Hotair.com.
DaveS on September 20, 2007 at 3:30 PM

You are assuming a moral equilency here that doesn’t exist. While commentators on this site will throw around words like traitor etc., Allah, Bryan, and Michelle are not the type that would take out a media ad that smears a public figure in a way that can not be substantiated. If they did, it would be wrong, but it’s not going to happen.

MorOn.org had the ad run before the General even gave his testimony. They smeared him without evidence that he had disgraced his position and trust or betrayed the country in any way, shape, or form. It is not the first time for MorOn.org. They just picked the wrong target at the wrong time and now there will be repercussions for thier politicians.

As for those politicians, they took an oath to America, which is to be first and foremost before their obligations to their backers and finaciers. That Shillary and the others (including my Senator, Osama Mama Murray) displayed where their allegencies are.

Mallard T. Drake on September 20, 2007 at 4:16 PM

RIGHT ON MITT…RIGHT ON…

areseaoh on September 20, 2007 at 4:18 PM

Mallard T. Drake on September 20, 2007 at 4:16 PM

My point is simply that Hillary wasn’t given a simple binary choice of “supporting Petraeus/troops”, yes or no.

She had that choice compounded with the choice of signing onto what amounts to a partisan, anti-MoveOn press-release. She would probably be more inclined to disagree with MoveOn and sign it if it didn’t require her to label a major donor as “a slanderous liberal activist group”.

I can almost guarantee you that if it didn’t have the anti-MoveOn rhetoric included, almost all of the dissenters would have signed it, and I can absolutely guarantee you that that is precisely the reason that the rhetoric was included.

DaveS on September 20, 2007 at 4:21 PM

Mallard T. Drake on September 20, 2007 at 4:16 PM

Great points.

DaveS, I think you’re trying to be too fair. We on the right don’t really have a counterpart to moveon. There are extremists out there, but we disavow them.

csdeven on September 20, 2007 at 4:21 PM

Perhaps you were too young (or not even born?) in 1959 when Alaska and Hawaii were admitted to the Union. There were much more strategic reasons for their admission. A little knowledge of history often helps in forming opinions.

For enlightening background, I refer you here:
Alaska/Hawaii Added to the Union

…and here:
STATEHOOD IN HAWAII: REMEMBERING 1959

…and here:
Proclamation 5230—Hawaii Statehood Silver Jubilee Day

’nuff?

leepro on September 20, 2007 at 4:24 PM

She would probably be more inclined to disagree with MoveOn and sign it if it didn’t require her to label a major donor as “a slanderous liberal activist group”.

I can almost guarantee you that if it didn’t have the anti-MoveOn rhetoric included, almost all of the dissenters would have signed it, and I can absolutely guarantee you that that is precisely the reason that the rhetoric was included.

DaveS on September 20, 2007 at 4:21 PM

Whoa, whoa, whoa!!! Are you a liberal Dave??

Hillary has had ample opportunity to denounce the message SEVERAL times and she refused. This resolution was just to put them on record for what they have been saying since this ad first aired. And it’s about time we did, because they have actually been this traitorous for a long time.

csdeven on September 20, 2007 at 4:24 PM

(b) Sense of Senate.–It is the sense of the Senate–

(1) to reaffirm its support for all the men and women of the United States Armed Forces, including General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq;

So we can read this to mean that it’s NOT the sense of 25 Senators to reaffirm support for all the men and women of the United States Armed Forces.

Yes, this is me now questioning your patriotism.

TexasRainmaker on September 20, 2007 at 4:26 PM

My last post (leepro on September 20, 2007 at 4:24 PM) should’ve been addressed to
Zach on September 20, 2007 at 3:54 PM

leepro on September 20, 2007 at 4:26 PM

DaveS asked if we would expect conservative senators to vote for a resolution that stated this:

(8) A recent attack through a full-page advertisement in the New York Times by the neocon activist group, Hotair.com, impugns the honor and integrity of [WHOEVER] and all the members of the [WHATEVER]

(b) Sense of Senate.–It is the sense of the Senate–

(3) to specifically repudiate the unwarranted personal attack on [WHOEVER] by the neocon activist group Hotair.com.

Well, no – Republican senators would never have to vote on something like this because HotAir would NEVER stoop so low as to put an ad like this in the NYT.

Make sense?

pullingmyhairout on September 20, 2007 at 4:30 PM

I think that language was added to see if the democrats side with the troops or with a liberal activist group. It makes it very clear where their loyalties are.

pullingmyhairout on September 20, 2007 at 4:31 PM

Hillary has had ample opportunity to denounce the message SEVERAL times and she refused.

I know… I’m just saying that we screwed up by giving her a plausible excuse for not signing it. It was unnecessarily antagonistic. It could have read a little less like a Republican campaign speech and had a stronger effect.

DaveS on September 20, 2007 at 4:31 PM

Heh, and I’m not trying to be “fair”. I’m trying to keep us from going off the deep end.

DaveS on September 20, 2007 at 4:32 PM

I see what you’re getting at, but I still think it’s wasted effort. Conservatives are always harder on other conservatives. Look at how we treat those who have lapses in moral and ethical judgment. We don’t wait for other to pass resolutions requiring us to denounce reprehensible behavior. We are the first to act.

It’s like you’re preaching to the choir.

csdeven on September 20, 2007 at 4:37 PM

DaveS is in full spin…he’s very dizzy…

areseaoh on September 20, 2007 at 4:47 PM

I can almost guarantee you that if it didn’t have the anti-MoveOn rhetoric included, almost all of the dissenters would have signed it, and I can absolutely guarantee you that that is precisely the reason that the rhetoric was included.
DaveS on September 20, 2007 at 4:21 PM

Um, if the Resolution didn’t mention Moveon.org or their ad (if it instead said, as you so eloquently suggested, “whoever” and “whatever”) then it would have no point. It would have just been a vague platitude to the effect that general Patreaus is a swell guy.

What you are suggesting is that we should let the Democrats call general Patreaus a liar, and let them cultivate the support of people who call general Patreaus a traitor one day; and then the next day we should help the same people wrap themselves in his uniform.

Well, I can honestly say I agree with you about one thing: you do have absolutely no interest whatsoever in being fair.

logis on September 20, 2007 at 4:58 PM

Perhaps you were too young (or not even born?) in 1959 when Alaska and Hawaii were admitted to the Union. There were much more strategic reasons for their admission. A little knowledge of history often helps in forming opinions.

For enlightening background, I refer you here:
Alaska/Hawaii Added to the Union

…and here:

STATEHOOD IN HAWAII: REMEMBERING 1959

…and here:
Proclamation 5230—Hawaii Statehood Silver Jubilee Day

’nuff?

leepro on September 20, 2007 at 4:24 PM

That’s what I said before.

Without the strategic US military base, Hawaii would just be another island in the Pacific.

Zach on September 20, 2007 at 5:01 PM

I can almost guarantee you that if it didn’t have the anti-MoveOn rhetoric included, almost all of the dissenters would have signed it, and I can absolutely guarantee you that that is precisely the reason that the rhetoric was included.

DaveS on September 20, 2007 at 4:21 PM

Well, I haven’t had time to read any quotes from the dissenters as to why they voted against the resolution. Still, it, using the libs own terms, spoke truth to power. It also has been very useful for separating the wheat from the chaffe. They can’t hide now. The vote is on the record.

Mallard T. Drake on September 20, 2007 at 5:07 PM

I see what you’re getting at, but I still think it’s wasted effort. Conservatives are always harder on other conservatives. Look at how we treat those who have lapses in moral and ethical judgment. We don’t wait for other to pass resolutions requiring us to denounce reprehensible behavior. We are the first to act.

It’s like you’re preaching to the choir.

csdeven on September 20, 2007 at 4:37 PM

Case in point: any thread regarding certain candidates. We are much tougher on our own than the other side.

jdawg on September 20, 2007 at 5:19 PM

It could have read a little less like a Republican campaign speech and had a stronger effect.

DaveS on September 20, 2007 at 4:31 PM

I disagree. I think it needs to be strong to have any effect. The dems who voted against this are showing thier real allegiance.

jdawg on September 20, 2007 at 5:20 PM

Golly Gee Whiz! My own (sic) senator, Big Dick Durbin of Illinois voted NAY? And the other guy was a no show?

Like I should be surprised, right?

pilamaye on September 20, 2007 at 5:21 PM

Hey, take it easy on poor Hillary, she just had to return all of Hsu’s money, she can’t diss the MO crowd.

stenwin77 on September 20, 2007 at 5:21 PM

Looks like MoveOn was right when they said “It’s our party. We bought it. We own it”.

SoulGlo on September 20, 2007 at 5:34 PM

Surprised to see Kleagle Byrd in there. Didn’t peg him as a whacked moveon democrat.

Also surprising that the RINOs did not pile on.

Valiant on September 20, 2007 at 5:37 PM

Surprised to see Kleagle Byrd in there. Didn’t peg him as a whacked moveon democrat.

Also surprising that the RINOs did not pile on.

Valiant on September 20, 2007 at 5:37 PM

Way I see Byrd… he’s senile. Probably votes on every issue as instructed by handlers.

leepro on September 20, 2007 at 5:46 PM

But don’t question their (those who voted Nay) patriotism.

The GOP is going to have a field day with this and rightfully so IMO.

Yakko77 on September 20, 2007 at 6:00 PM

Do note that the entire Senate leadership of the DhimmiRAT Party voted to back MoveOn/NYT over the US military, and that every DhimmiRAT Presidential candidate that had a voice chose to either back MoveOn/NYT over the US military or cut and run.

steveegg on September 20, 2007 at 6:14 PM

I want to see some ads – how about something along the lines of “those who won’t support our soldiers are not fit to be commander-in-chief”

Works for me.

jdawg on September 20, 2007 at 6:37 PM

Hillary is a certified Marxist and the rest of the “no” gaggle are MoveOn.Org lackeys.

rplat on September 20, 2007 at 6:50 PM

That vote tells it all. Hillary “her_thighness” Clinton is against the troops and no matter what she says, her actions have spoken.

Wade on September 20, 2007 at 7:35 PM

Vile,disgusting,beneath contempt,indefencible. And still, Hillary will have at least a 50/50 chance of being the next President of the United States, and the democrats will have at least as good of a chance in not only holding control of the House and Senate, but of adding seats.
Figure that out.

tomk59 on September 20, 2007 at 8:20 PM

Good God, how in the hell did Harry Reid let such a resolution get to a vote.

I can’t believe we’re losing to these guys.

Dudley Smith on September 20, 2007 at 8:36 PM

She looks more and like John Kerry every day… She was for Petraeus, before she was against him… before she was for him… before she was against him again.

She called him a liar in the hearings (don’t give me that “she didn’t say liar BS, you know what she said) and she refused to denounce the MoveOn ad, then when pressed she said that she’s always supported and admired Petraeus, etc. etc. the usual liberal “we love the military too” BS. Now she’s slapping him the face again.

Screw you Hillary.

RightWinged on September 20, 2007 at 8:55 PM

So now we are condoning voting against political speech? So the next time Ann Coulter publishes a book the Republicans will be called on to condemn her?

R-I-D-I-C-U-L-O-U-S, voting against a newspaper ad, very political theater.

No wonder Congress has such a low rating. This country is doomed.

AprilOrit on September 20, 2007 at 9:07 PM

Hillary is a certified Marxist and the rest of the “no” gaggle are MoveOn.Org lackeys.

And what’s the difference between Moveon.org and HowToHateJohnKerryForDummies.org AKA The Swiftboat Losers for truth?

Same asylum, different patients….the same Far Right and Left Fringe that is destroying America, period.

AprilOrit on September 20, 2007 at 9:12 PM

AprilOrit on September 20, 2007 at 9:12 PM

Because Kerry is a scum, a liar, and a traitor to the US military. He, like Murtha, accused the troops of behavior he could not prove.

People like that NEED to be exposed for the good of this country.

And the vote wasn’t to silence them, the vote was to condemn their traitorous attacks on an unreproachable patriot of this country.

csdeven on September 20, 2007 at 10:40 PM

(b) Sense of Senate.–It is the sense of the Senate–
(1) to reaffirm its support for all the men and women of the United States Armed Forces, including General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq;

IF you voted against this….you voted against supporting our military. The Dems who did vote against it MUST be closely tied to Moveon.org.

Our President said it better than anyone today. They are more concerned with supporting a left-wing org than supporting our military.

casador06 on September 20, 2007 at 10:52 PM

With this vote, what more does anyone need to know that it is imperative to keep the anti-military Democrats out of the White House and out of majority control in Congress?

Phil Byler on September 20, 2007 at 11:05 PM

It’s a trap!

SouthernDem on September 20, 2007 at 3:37 PM

Exactly, SouthernDem.

DaveS on September 20, 2007 at 3:38 PM

And I’m really surprised she fell for it. I thought she had more discipline. Remember the swing voters Hillary?Remember that there will be life after the primary–known as the general election, in which you will need to appeal to more than 12% of the population? I always thought that at least she was politically shrewd. Not so, it seems.

I can’t wait until the attack ads start coming out. The Dems been handing them unbelievable material ever since the last election. It’s gonna be fun. And the Kos Kids will need to borrow Glenn Beck’s duct tape to keep their heads from exploding when Hillary finally realizes she’s going to have to pay attention to another constituency. Heh, heh. When she gets to the convention Hillary is going to have to twist herself into a pretzel to make everyone happy that she will want to make happy. Pass the popcorn.

smellthecoffee on September 21, 2007 at 12:05 AM

I always thought that at least she was politically shrewd.

Hey, Hillary is the smartest person in the room. As long as she’s alone in a closet.

trigon on September 21, 2007 at 12:50 AM

When one is dealing intimately with the snakes, one should expect, in lieu of magnanimity, perfidy and deceit.

Take Massachusetts:
Its football team cheats.
Its baseball team folds
One senator murdered a young girl
Another senator consorted with the enemy
Its Big Dig construction project ran up a 20 BILLION dollar (2000%) cost overrun and even here they cheated on the concrete leading to fatal results.
Its legislature, in addition to protecting child molesters, OKed a bill allowing instate school tuition for illegal aliens but NOT for visiting servicemen.

No wonder they and other Democratic henchmen guttersnipe patriotic generals. Snakes bite. That’s all they do.

MaiDee on September 21, 2007 at 1:00 AM

AprilOrit

Please tell me what part of any of Ann Coulters writings defamed our troops in harms way? And there is a big difference when pointing out discrepancies in the actions of someone who claims one thing and did another i.e. was in Cambodia on Christmas but really wasn’t, and preemptively disparaging a leader just to lay the ground work for dismissing his report.

Gwillie on September 21, 2007 at 1:22 AM

Zach, you need to add Wisconsin to your list of moonbat controlled states.

georgej on September 21, 2007 at 2:14 AM

AprilOrit

These Coulter quotes are for you…

“Liberals have a preternatural gift for always striking a position on the side of treason. Everyone says liberals love America, too. No, they don’t.”

[Ann Coulter, "Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism," Crown, 2003, Chapter 8]

“They attack the country, the flag, ‘God Bless America,’ and denounce patriotic people as flag-waving yahoos. They oppose cleaning out the swamp where terrorism comes from and measures for domestic security,” says Coulter. “If they aren’t traitors, how are we supposed to tell the difference?” [Worldnetdaily.com interview]

georgej on September 21, 2007 at 2:19 AM

“Liberals have a preternatural gift for always striking a position on the side of treason. Everyone says liberals love America, too. No, they don’t.” [Ann Coulter, “Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism,” Crown, 2003, Chapter 8]georgej on September 21, 2007 at 2:19 AM

I’ve thought it over, and I’ve decided I’m going to support liberals from now on – the same way they “support” the troops: I love all liberals personally – I just hate everything that they do.

And I’m going to be loyal to the Democratic Party the same way liberals are “patriotic” toward America – by constantly criticizing it and opposing it at every turn.

Sure, I always assume – without demanding anything remotely resembling credible evidence – that all liberals are murderous Nazis. But it is in no way their fault that they are all a bunch of modern-day Brownshirts. Liberals just have bad leaders, and they are brainwashed to be nothing but mindless slaves. So if that’s what Hillter wants them to be, they are only following orders.

Of course the fact that liberals all VOLUNTEERED to follow a mad dictator in her quest to destroy the world does not in any way reflect poorly on them personally. Let’s face it, the average liberal is undereducated, uncouth and hopelessly incapable of getting a decent job.

Oh, sure liberals SAY they don’t want my support. But what the Hell do they know? I’m only trying to see to it that they all get redeployed to someplace where they can be more safe and effective – where my precious little liberals will never again have to even see, let alone fight against, anyone who dislikes them.

logis on September 21, 2007 at 6:18 AM

Pass the popcorn.
smellthecoffee on September 21, 2007 at 12:05 AM

I’m with ya! Political theater is the grandest theater of all.

SouthernDem on September 21, 2007 at 8:11 AM

I would love to now see the Republicans take advantage of the situation here and call each and every Democrat who votde against this resolution to condemn Moveon.org and publically demand they explain their reasons for voting against it. Of course the answer is obvious, namely if they had voted for it, they would be in George Soros’ crosshairs right now and their political careers would be over. What I would really like to see is for the Republicans to really show some guts now, and demand that Soros and Moveon appear on Capital Hill and explain their actions for the ad. It would be great to see the Democrats squirm in their seats while Soros was being grilled. Of course, that will never happen as long as Reid and Pelosi are in power.

pilamaye on September 21, 2007 at 8:37 AM

The only thing surprising is the number of dhiminicrats voting to support General Petraeus.

Texas Nick 77 on September 21, 2007 at 8:44 AM

Hey, Hillary is the smartest person in the room. As long as she’s alone in a closet.

trigon on September 21, 2007 at 12:50 AM

LMAO. Good one.

Texas Nick 77 on September 21, 2007 at 8:49 AM

Hillary does realize that the job she’s applying for is Commander in Chief, right?

If Hildabeast is elected, I project:
1. retentions rates will go through the basement
2. retirement rates will go through the roof
3. recruitment will suffer the worst rates ever.
Alot will stay for the love of country, but alot will leave. There will be respect for the position, but not the person.

Tennessee Dave on September 21, 2007 at 9:07 AM

Every little bit helps both sides.

Let 2007 equal 1857.

I getting tired of talk. Seeing my country dominated by those who view my children as sex objects, and think illegal aliens are the “second coming,” it is time for a serious change.

Wuptdo on September 21, 2007 at 9:09 AM

From DKos:

Do the Democrats even know who votes for them anymore? Don’t they understand that if they continue to piss off the die-hard Democrats, the MoveOn Democrats, they are going to continue to lose elections?

Considering they’re always threatening to pull their support, they’re not really die-hard Democrats are they?

aengus on September 21, 2007 at 9:13 AM

aren’t these kind of resolutions pointless? isnt that what we said when the dems wanted non-binding resolutions on this that and the other thing? why get heated now?

ernesto on September 21, 2007 at 9:23 AM

Way I see Byrd… he’s senile. Probably votes on every issue as instructed by handlers.

leepro on September 20, 2007 at 5:46 PM

Byrd may be senile but he looks young and vigorous compared to Levin (D-MI). Our Michigan Senators such reliable knee jerks they don’t need strings attached. These puppets are rarely interviewed because who needs to move the head up and down when you can just play the DVD.

The sad State of Michigan, with the worst prognosis in the nation, is contemplating an income tax hike while the governor touts the ‘Cool Cities‘ program that grants feel good bucks in quarter mil bundles to attend seminars on how to be cool. Something about attracting the ‘Creative Class’

How do you measure diversity in a city?
We currently measure the number of persons foreign born per capita, self- identified gays per capita, self-identified artists and musicians (Bohemian occupations) per capita, persons of color per capita, interracial marriages per capital and the integration of these groups in our neighborhoods… from the Cool Cities web site

Yes folks, Bohemians are the future in Michigan. on our dime!

Yes, Levin and Stabenow are true Michiganian DEMs.

They should run this vote every month in the Senate.

entagor on September 21, 2007 at 10:25 AM

I just read the article, and only a couple of the posts…Wow. That’s unbelievable. That resolution was almost entirely statements of fact. The only thing they could be in disagreement with is whether or not MoveOn.org was wrong to attack him. Unbelievable. On the bright side, at least they are showing who they really are, and who’s funding them.

samuelrylander on September 21, 2007 at 1:49 PM

entagor on September 21, 2007 at 10:25 AM
As a fellow Michigander and former democrate, I agree. It is so sad to see the democrates crumble to Moveon.org. The party line idiots like our Michigan senators make it way too easy for them to take the democratic party over. I cannot remember when the last time was that either of them had anything of value to add to anything.
Now our idiot state reps. want to raise taxes instead of living within thier means.
What on earth are they thinking when trying to raise taxes in a bankrupt state?
Want a preveiw of what is going to happen to the rest of the country? Just keep an eye on Michigan and it’s moveon/democratic leadership.

leanright on September 21, 2007 at 3:24 PM

sorry about the e on the tail end of democrat, they don’t deserve anything extra.

leanright on September 21, 2007 at 3:28 PM

Well I’m glad Hillary did this, now the left can just drop whatever pretense it had of ‘supporting the troops’ and ‘defending America’. No need to fake it anymore. They can finally just let go and start printing their “I Hate America!” campaign bumper stickers.

Keli on September 21, 2007 at 5:12 PM

Clinton’s vote Nay on the Senate’s Petraeus Resolution is yet another reflection of Hill and Bill always having put self before party and party before Country.
.

That to me is amoral opportunism, reminiscent of Shakespeare’s character Casca with his “lean and hungry look” in Julius Caesar. A blind ambition for power and no moral code but that of expedience.
.
Given the wording of the Resolution, I don’t see how any Senator could honorably vote Nay. And Biden and Obama’s abstentions are even more invertebrate.

DavePa on September 22, 2007 at 1:38 PM

Tim Russert is giving Hillary a milk toast interview this am on “Meet The Press”. He specifically asked her about the Patraeus ad and denouncing moveon.org. She pointed to her vote for the Boxer amendment which denounced attacks on general military personnel. He failed to mention that she refused to support the general and her despicable remarks calling general Patraeus a liar and a tool for the Bush administration.

I don’t know if Tim is a tool for the liberals or if he was forced to stay away from those subjects because that was the only way she would do the interview.

Either way, my leanings away from him as a non-partisan voice are just about complete. He rarely presses the dem candidates on their hypocrisy’s and that just isn’t fair and balanced.

csdeven on September 23, 2007 at 10:36 AM

Russert also allowed her to give BS answers to the questions he did ask that were getting into her lies and changing positions.

She excuse the Hsu scandal by pointing out that all the campaigns missed it. Tim should have suggested that perhaps the campaigns were tacit in it.

She lied about her Iraq war vote. She was adamant that we forget the past and focus on what to do now. I’ll remember that the next time she blames the war on WMD’s, Bush’s lies, and other water under the bridge. He should have held her to that commitment.

She dragged out Bill’s presidency. He should have rejected it out of hand and demanded she stand on her own.

She did admit she made mistakes with Hillarycare, but claimed her new plan is not government run. She also said it was the federal governments job to PROVIDE health care.

I’m pretty sure she was on with Chris Wallace this am too. I hope he drills that 8itch right between the eyes when she starts her pathological lying.

This woman is scum.

csdeven on September 23, 2007 at 10:46 AM

Comment pages: 1 2