Senate Republicans Block Debate On Iraq

[Nbadan]

WASHINGTON - Republicans blocked a full-fledged Senate debate over Iraq on Monday, but Democrats vowed they still would find a way to force President Bush to change course in a war that has claimed the lives of more than 3,000 U.S. troops.

"We must heed the results of the November elections and the wishes of the American people," said Majority Leader Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record).

Reid, D-Nev., spoke moments before a vote that sidetracked a nonbinding measure expressing disagreement with Bush's plan to deploy an additional 21,500 troops to Iraq.

The vote was 49-47, or 11 short of the 60 needed to go ahead with debate, and left the fate of the measure uncertain

The non-binding resolution would have done nothing to stop the war. George would have ignored it anyway. Just last week Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell vowed that Republican leaders would not try and block Biden's resolution (http://www.navytimes.com/news/2007/01/apmcconnell070129/). Guess he had a change of heart.

Most disappointing is that 70% of the american public wants this debate to happen. Both TX senators voted to protect the Bush administration.

Here (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00044#position) is the roll call on the Senate resolution.

[Nbadan]

If the Demos need a candidate with some cahones, they need to look no further than Russ Feingold..

BREAKING: Feingold Excoriates Fellow Democrats for Failing to 'Play Hardball' in Ending Iraq WarDuring Conference Call with Bloggers, the Wisconsin Senator Highly Critical of Colleagues, 'Washinton Insiders' and Even John Edwards for 'Playing it Safe on This One' Says 'Dems Trying to Have it Both Ways' While 'Americans are Dying Unnecessarily'...

Blogged by Brad Friedman from Phoenix, AZ...


In a conference call with several bloggers moments ago, Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) had a number of harsh words concerning today's procedural bickering and fillibustering by Republicans in the Senate which stifled both votes on his own resolution to end the Iraq War as well as allowing amendments to several non-binding resolutions which also failed to come to the floor for a full vote.

Feingold was highly critical not just of the Republicans, but even moreso of his own Democratic caucus colleagues, "Washington insider consultants" and even former Senatorial colleague turned Presidential Candidate, John Edwards for failing to take a tough stand to end the war.

In a passionate thirty minute call, Feingold stressed, "This is an important moment to see if we're gonna try and end this war. Frankly, I'm disappointed that Democrats are playing it safe on this one."

"We need to play hardball on this. We're gonna have to take the lead on this issue and we're gonna need to tie this place up as long as it takes," he said in describing what he sees as a fear and timidity so far by his colleagues who are now in the majority in the Senate.

Brad Blog (http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4123)

Can't trust a candidate who voted for the Iraq war resolution and refuses to play hard-ball to bring our troops home, that's you Hillary and John Edwards.

[boutons_]

The Repugs say the resolution is "meaningless" but they fight like hell to block it (because in fact they know the Congress voting against dubya's bullshit war would be extremely meaningful now and throughout history of the dubya Exec), saying "you can't pass meaningless resolution, but we won't block you if you want to pass a resolution to cut funding "for the troops". "

motherfuckers.

[exstatic]

Can't we just get an up or down vote? :lol

I'll bet the GOP is thanking their lucky stars they never invoked the "Nuclear option".

[spurster]

I hope this answers the question why the Democrats aren't doing anything. It will be because the GOP blocked it (and Lieberman, too!).

[exstatic]

The House has no filibuster rule. They control the purse strings, too. Anything that is different between House and Senate bills gets resolved in conference committee. Also no filibuster. I'd say it'll go more the Dems way than Shrub's over the next two years.

[1369]

Damn dirty Republicans.

But wait, there's more.

I guess the Democrats get a pass for playing the obstructionist with regards to the four additional proposals and the Gregg language, don't they.

Would be a shame to have the Dems vote to fund the troops before they voted not to fund them now wouldn't it?

[Nbadan]

Damn dirty Republicans.

But wait, there's more.

I guess the Democrats get a pass for playing the obstructionist with regards to the four additional proposals and the Gregg language, don't they.

Would be a shame to have the Dems vote to fund the troops before they voted not to fund them now wouldn't it?

1369 is a lunatic, but even a broken clock is right twice a day. The Demos have been weak with leadership. The Demo candidates have been weak. Biden? Anyone? Ok, anyone other Demo candidate than Dennis?

[1369]

1369 is a lunatic, but even a broken clock is right twice a day. The Demos have been weak with leadership. The Demo candidates have been weak. Biden? Anyone? Ok, anyone other Demo candidate than Dennis?

Save the lunatic talk for your weekly MUFON meetings Dan. Did the Dems or did they not block the four other proposals?

[Nbadan]

Save the lunatic talk for your weekly MUFON meetings Dan. Did the Dems or did they not block the four other proposals?

Who cares, they were non-binding proposals - no teeth.

Dubya would have ignored them anyway.