Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Senate votes against debating troop buildup
Reuters ^ | 2/5/06

Posted on 02/05/2007 3:11:22 PM PST by Mongeaux

Edited on 02/05/2007 3:33:35 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

WASHINGTON - A bipartisan resolution repudiating President Bush's decision to send 21,500 more troops to Iraq failed to advance in the Senate Monday, dealing a serious setback to critics of the war.

The resolution needed 60 votes before the 100-member Senate could begin debate, but it got 49, with 47 voting against. Although it would not have been binding on the president, the measure was the first serious effort in Congress to confront Bush over the unpopular Iraq war.

The president's call to send additional American troops, mostly to Baghdad, is widely seen as a last chance to quell the sectarian violence ravaging the capital and surrounding regions.

Excerpt


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: antisurgeresolution; democrattakeover; iraqresolution; philbuster
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 261-274 next last
Dems hate debate.
1 posted on 02/05/2007 3:11:23 PM PST by Mongeaux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Mongeaux

You misunderstand...
This is the GOP filibuster.


2 posted on 02/05/2007 3:12:08 PM PST by Samurai_Jack (ride out and confront the evil!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mongeaux

If it's cloture, then the measure was to cut off debate.


3 posted on 02/05/2007 3:12:59 PM PST by Dilbert56
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mongeaux

thank God. Senate GOP seem to have grown some sort of spine.


4 posted on 02/05/2007 3:13:35 PM PST by BoBToMatoE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mongeaux

Harry Reid..you've been pwned!!!!
How does that s@#t sandwich taste now...that's for all the non-votes on confirmation! I hope John Bolton is kicking back with some scotch!


5 posted on 02/05/2007 3:13:46 PM PST by Braak (The US Military, the real arms inspectors!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mongeaux
AP: Republicans block full-fledged Senate debate over Iraq.

Just a banner over at MSDNC. Looks like the Republicans bottled up one of the resolutions in committee.

6 posted on 02/05/2007 3:13:50 PM PST by CFC__VRWC (Go Gators! NCAA Football and Basketball Champions!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CFC__VRWC

***Moonbat Suicide Watch In Effect***


7 posted on 02/05/2007 3:15:35 PM PST by Reagan80 ("Government is not the solution to our problems, Government IS the problem." -RR; 1980 Inaugural)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: CFC__VRWC

***Moonbat Suicide Watch In Effect***


8 posted on 02/05/2007 3:15:56 PM PST by Reagan80 ("Government is not the solution to our problems, Government IS the problem." -RR; 1980 Inaugural)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Samurai_Jack
Yes, the headline has changed already - it is now "AP Republicans Block full-fledged Senate debate over Iraq". My mistake - I thought the Dems were trying to muscle the resolution through.

GO G.O.P.!

9 posted on 02/05/2007 3:16:51 PM PST by Mongeaux (''I would sooner be governed by the first 2,000 names in the Boston phone directory," W.F. Buckley)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Braak

LOL!


10 posted on 02/05/2007 3:17:41 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Forgot your tagline? Click here to have it resent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Reagan80

I'll bet Harry's giving some real thought to going "nuclear" right about now.


11 posted on 02/05/2007 3:18:12 PM PST by CFC__VRWC (Go Gators! NCAA Football and Basketball Champions!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mongeaux
"Traitorous Proposal Confined to Committee"
12 posted on 02/05/2007 3:19:32 PM PST by finnman69 (cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestus globus, inflammare animos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mongeaux

The Republicans looked at their bank accounts and realized the punishment for siding with rats.


13 posted on 02/05/2007 3:19:32 PM PST by tobyhill (The War on Terrorism is not for the weak.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mongeaux

Dims only mustered 49 votes . . . 11 short.


14 posted on 02/05/2007 3:23:06 PM PST by savedbygrace (SECURE THE BORDERS FIRST (I'M YELLING ON PURPOSE))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Samurai_Jack

I'm not sure filibuster's a good tactic, since this is a non-binding resolution. Let the 'rats and their fifth-column Republican allies put themselves on record, and then let history heap the scorn on them that they deserve.


15 posted on 02/05/2007 3:23:47 PM PST by My2Cents ("I support the right-ward most candidate who has a legitimate chance to win." -- W.F. Buckley)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Samurai_Jack
From Power Line this afternoon:

The Senate may take its first vote on the Warner/Levin anti-"surge" resolution as early as later today. Republican leaders in the Senate are trying to block a vote on the Warner resolution through a filibuster, unless the Democrats also permit votes on two competing resolutions. Dianne Feinstein says that blocking a vote on Warner/Levin would be a "terrible mistake:"

"It's obstructionism," said Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. "This is not tolerable in a situation where it's the number one topic in the nation, and the Republican party prevents the Senate of the United States from debating."

That's a lot of obfuscation crammed into a couple of sentences. The purpose of a filibuster is not to "prevent the Senate from debating," but rather to prevent the Senate from voting. The Dems can debate to their hearts' content. And with respect to voting, the Republicans aren't necessarily averse to voting on Warner/Levin, they just want the other resolutions to come before the Senate as well. It's hard to see what's "obstructionist" about that.

And Feinstein tries to differentate the Republicans' "obstructionism" from the Democrats' use of the filibuster when Republicans controlled the Senate, e.g. to block judicial nominations. Feinstein says the filibuster is improper here because Iraq is the "number one topic in the nation." That may be true, but the nonbinding resolutions at issue aren't the number one topic; on the contrary, unlike judicial nominations, they have no practical impact at all.

UPDATE: The cloture vote on the Levin/Warner resolution is scheduled for 5:30 eastern time. Republican leadership reportedly expects its caucus to hold firm on insisting that amendments and/or competing resolutions be permitted. Ongoing negotiations could lead to a procedural resolution either before or after the scheduled vote.


16 posted on 02/05/2007 3:24:41 PM PST by Mongeaux (''I would sooner be governed by the first 2,000 names in the Boston phone directory," W.F. Buckley)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mongeaux
See here for more info behind this development...
17 posted on 02/05/2007 3:25:38 PM PST by The Electrician ("Government is the only enterprise in the world which expands in size when its failures increase.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace

What were the names?

From that count, I'm going to hazard that a couple of people on both sides flipped.

Lieberman must have voted with us. And...?


18 posted on 02/05/2007 3:26:04 PM PST by furquhart (Gingrich for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Admin Moderator

Can we get a headline change to clear this one up?


19 posted on 02/05/2007 3:26:47 PM PST by furquhart (Gingrich for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mongeaux

Doesn't Dirty Harry remember?

A filibuster does not limit debate, it is endless debate, we just want to make sure we get the issue right by debating it ad infinitum, just like those judges.


20 posted on 02/05/2007 3:27:09 PM PST by RWR8189 (Support the Republican Study Committee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 261-274 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson