Thread: again the Repulbicans don't want to debate

again the Repulbicans don't want to debate the most important issue.
I will have to pay them back in November 2008

---

Republicans block Iraq war debate

Mr Bush plans to send 21,500 additional US troops to Iraq
A resolution opposing President George W Bush's decision to send extra troops to Iraq has failed to advance in the US Senate, dealing a blow to war critics.
The measure needed 60 votes before the 100-member Senate could begin debate, but it got 49, with 47 voting against.

Although non-binding, it was the first serious effort in Congress to confront the White House over the war in Iraq.

Since the US-led invasion in 2003, more than 3,000 US troops and tens of thousands of Iraqis have been killed.

The resolution opposed Mr Bush's plan to send 21,500 additional troops to Iraq, the majority of them to violence-hit Baghdad in an effort to end sectarian clashes.

It called on the White House to examine all other possibilities. Mr Bush has said it is something he has already done.

It was the first time Democrats had scheduled a fully-fledged debate on the Iraq war since they won control of Congress in last year's mid-term elections.

'Uncertain fate'

The text of the bipartisan, non-binding resolution was proposed by senior Republican John Warner and it is unclear what will happen to the measure now.


Almost $700bn of the 2008 budget is earmarked for military spending
Groups from the left and the right proposed amendments up to the last minute, as senators tried to balance criticism of the Bush administration with loyalty to US troops in Iraq.

Several Republicans supported the resolution, but there were not enough to block the efforts of White House loyalists in the Senate to prevent it from coming to a vote.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell described the vote as "a bump in the road" and added that GOP lawmakers "welcome the debate and are happy to have it".

Some Democrats said they would oppose the resolution because it did not go far enough.

Earlier, Mr Bush sent his budget plan to the Democrat-controlled Congress for approval, requesting extra funding for the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Almost $700bn (£357bn) is earmarked for new military spending.

The Democratic majority leader, Senator Harry Reid, said that the budget, which also proposes large health care cuts, was not in tune with the needs of ordinary Americans.

Nonsense. It was nothing more than a bit of politicking by the new Dem. majority, and it was shot down as such. What possible value is there to a non-binding resolution while we have troops in harm's way? If the Dems cared about the troops and were willing to put their political fortunes where their mouths are, they would have passed more than a bitchy resolution. Congress has the power to suspend operations and demand that the troops be brought home if that's what its members believe is the best course. But they don't believe it's the best course, they just want to make political hay and they don't give a damn what it does to the morale of the troops or, more importantly, how it buoys the morale of the enemy seeking to kill them.

CG wrote:

Nonsense. It was nothing more than a bit of politicking by the new Dem. majority, and it was shot down as such. What possible value is there to a non-binding resolution while we have troops in harm's way? If the Dems cared about the troops and were willing to put their political fortunes where their mouths are, they would have passed more than a bitchy resolution.

Yeah, with Sen. Harry "cry-baby" Reid (D-NV) as the head whinner! I swear, that illegal immigrant loving open borders kook should get an academy award for all the fake tears he sheds on the Senate floor.

Cassie, the Senate Democrats are doing nothing more than play acting and grandstanding for the benefit of the voting public. Hope you're enjoying the show. Fortunately most of us are able to see right through the fakes.

The sentiments of the Democrats as regard the war in Iraq is best described by paraphrasing John Turncoat Kerry: They were for it before they were against it.

If it becomes politically expedient to be for it again (say election season 200, you can be sure that they will be for it again.

Originally Posted by MW

Cassie, the Senate Democrats are doing nothing more than play acting and grandstanding for the benefit of the voting public. Hope you're enjoying the show. Fortunately most of us are able to see right through the fakes.

What fakes ? The Dems won congress b/c we're sick and tired of the war.