Posted on 01/26/2007 10:13:09 AM PST by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON - Democrats intend to begin debate in the Senate next week on a nonbinding measure declaring President Bush's planned troop increase in Iraq is "not in the national interest," officials said Friday, with a quick test vote likely.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee approved the measure Wednesday on a near party-line vote of 12-9, acting one day after Bush implored lawmakers in his State of the Union address to give his revised war strategy a chance to work.
I will update thread as article updates.
Do it, McConnell.
A US Marine talks on an army radio as his unit occupies a home to use as an observation point, during a reconnaissance mission, in the Iraqi city of Fallujah, in 2005. Nearly four years in Iraq have hammered US army and marines into a skilled counter-insurgency force but has left it unready for war against a conventionally armed foe, US generals warn.(AFP/File/David Furst)
Hey, Chip, ya hear the latest on what the dems are doing back home?
And Pelosi and others were quick to spend our money going to Iraq this week.
US Senator Joe Biden, D-DE, addresses the 75th Winter meeting of the United States Conference of Mayors being held in Washington, DC. US President George W. Bush received a stinging rebuke of his Iraq policy, as a Senate panel condemned his plan to pour more US troops into the war-ravaged country.(AFP/Mannie Garcia)
Will we see a filibuster, or will the Republicans roll over, exposing their soft underbellies while piddling on themselves?
I ALSO WANT REPUBLICANS TO READ INTO THE RECORD the newspaper records of Ted Kennedy's Chappaquidick adventures, and Robert Byrds' interview with Fox News Channel's Tony Snow, and I want read into the record--again--Chris Dodds' statements about what a great President Robert Byrd would have made.
Filibuster.
See post 9.
A non-binding resolution.
They dont think Mr. Bish's plan will work. This resolution will allow them to attack him if it doesnt and say they told him so.
Then again it might work---If it does they will say they didnt really stop him from doing what needed to be done, and they were really with him all the time.
They dont have the guts to stop Mr. Bush from putting more troops in Iraq so they are trying to cover their butts. They will say this is what they meant when they said cut and run, and lie to the Democrats that they did what they were elected to do.
This bill is no more than a deceptive, cowardly way to appease the voters that voted for cut and run.
The latter... they haven't a teste among them.
I believe it is time for a Constitutional Convention or we will need a revolution to save our nation. We need to reign in the power of Congress and the courts to re-institute the power of the Constitution.
We must change the terms of the Senate from 6 years to 3 years. We must remove the power of the Congress to raise their own Salaries and retirement perks. If they want a pay raise, put it on the ballot during presidential elections and let those employing them decide if they have earned a raise.
I fear for my nation when the state/commonwealth of Massachusetts which is the cradle of our Democracy, which gave us the Minutemen and the Boston Tea Party leading to our Independence continually re-elects TRAITORS to our Senate.
John Kerry is an ADMITTED traitor, He told our nation and the world he had met with his (our) enemies in Paris during our war in Viet Nam. Ted Kennedy met with the representatives of the Soviet Union to help them defeat the initives of President Regan to end the cold war. That IS TREASON.
The communists that vote in Ma. and Ca. keep returning communists to the Senate and the House, we need term limits on them...
Get all of the defeatists on record....be they Republican or Democrat.
File the names away and remember who stood for defeat.
Time to take names...
Bring a floor debate on! I want everybody to be put on record, without the opportunity to "revise and extend" their remarks.
18,278 people have signed The Pledge thus far. Will you?
If the United States Senate passes a resolution, non-binding or otherwise, that criticizes the commitment of additional troops to Iraq that General Petraeus has asked for and that the president has pledged, and if the Senate does so after the testimony of General Petraeus on January 23 that such a resolution will be an encouragement to the enemy, I will not contribute to any Republican senator who voted for the resolution. Further, if any Republican senator who votes for such a resolution is a candidate for re-election in 2008, I will not contribute to the National Republican Senatorial Committee unless the Chairman of that Committee, Senator Ensign, commits in writing that none of the funds of the NRSC will go to support the re-election of any senator supporting the non-binding resolution.
What Can You Do?
1. Sign the Pledge
http://truthlaidbear.com/thenrscpledge/
2. Contact your Senators and the Senate Republican leadership
3. Tell at least three friends about the Pledge
Try them for treason, let the jury find them guilty, and execute them.
I wouldn't filibuster. Instead, the Republicans should openly state in debate that this is a toothless, pointless, cowardly resolution that is OK for the Ithaca City Council but disgraceful for the US Senate.
If the 'rats and Hagelians don't have the stones to cut off funds, then they should either support the war or just shut up. Announcing to the world that the US Senate is an impotent bunch of gasbags is not a good way to kickoff the new 'rat majority.
Although I strongly disagree with Murtha and Kucinich and other cut-and-runners, I do respect the fact that they have taken a position. The nonbinding resolution supporters are just cowards who are proud to sit on the fence and criticise during wartime. COWARDS!!
I expect EVERY republican to stand on the floor of the senate, and argue that the person they just confirmed unanimously to be the general in Iraq NEEDS to be given EVERY resource he requests to win that war.
And since he has requested the 21,000 troops, that there will be NO VOTE on denying him the troops he says he needs to do his job.
To confirm a man for a position, and then deny him the tools he told you he needed to do his job, would be the height of irresponsibility.
The time to make your point about troops was in the confirmation vote. If sending 21,000 troops was BAD for america, then you should have voted to reject a man who was advocating something that was bad for america.
Now it's time for the republicans to stand up for what they just voted for, and stop trying to appease the democrats -- they are unappeasable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.