GOP to Bring a Vote on Troop Withdrawl & Embarass Dems

[kpete]

Vote Scheduled on Troop Withdrawl
The Hotline "has learned that the House GOP leadership will bring a symbolic, but politically charged, resolution to the floor today that would force Dems to register an up-or-down vote on Rep. John Murtha's call for U.S. troops to immediately withdraw from Iraq. The pre-Thanksgiving recess vote will force Dems to go on the record on one of the year's most sensitive issues and provide the NRCC a roll call vote on the so-called 'cut or run' question going into '06."

http://www.politicalwire.com/

[Clark2008]

1. Cut OR run?

That makes no sense.

Shouldn't it say "cut AND run?"

Sorry - semantics.

[Renew Deal]

2. Dems should vote for it unanimously if they are smart.

A couple of pukes will join them. That will position us well for 2006.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

7. No, no, no

Votes go on the record, and going on the record always comes back to bite you on your ass.

Democrats should just not show up.

[Renew Deal]

13. Fight for what you believe in.

Or get the hell out of Congress.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

18. Play the game smart,

or get voted out of Congress for falling for sly Republican tricks.

[Renew Deal]

25. The smart game is to call their bluff.

A couple of theirs will vote for it too.

[BurtWorm]

36. The smart move, actually, is to not play the game.

They should all withhold their votes, or vote present. Then maybe return with a resolution of their own condemning votes on the war that don't take it seriously.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

42. That's it - not show up

A vote is a record, and let's not forget Kerry's quote: "I voted for the war before I voted against it." Those who knew how bills get marked up and changed before final votes knew exactly what he meant, but that, as we now, is not common knowledge among the American public.

Never make a record if you don't have to.

[BurtWorm]

47. A tactic like this should not be given a bit of respect.

Democrats should turn this around and heap contempt on the Republicans for treating the war as nothing but a political football.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

54. Personally,

I'd like to see Jack Murtha out there every day, commenting on the bullshit the Republicans are doing while Americans are dying in Iraq.

I'd pay to see that. Really.

[Renew Deal]

51. Don't stand up for what you believe in.

Should that be the new Democratic mantra? That's what you're advocating.

[BurtWorm]

59. Don't let the Republicans treat the war like a joke.

This is serious business that Murtha was talking about and the GOP wants to play a game with it?! That's the bottom of the barrel. They should have every ounce of satisfaction stolen from them on this.

[Renew Deal]

67. I agree.

But I feel that "not showing up" would make us look weak. We can be strong and unanimous on this. One of the problems going into the next election is that we don't have a message. This is a chance to stand up for something. We support Murtha, his message and the democratic party. It's a united message and alternative for the American people.

[BurtWorm]

95. I certainly support it. But I really loathe the abuse of this issue

by the GOP. They should not be rewarded for playing these idiotic kinds of games. Over an issue like the war! It's disgusting!

[Yupster]

83. There's a funny line in the movie Dodgeball

just before the big game the coach says to his team in the huddle, "Now remember, what's our slogan," and the team happily responds with the correct answer

"Aim Low!"

Which I guess is good advice for Dodgeball.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

90. That is a very, very

funny movie.

Rip Torn slays me. But, it really was funny.

[VaYallaDawg]

166. I hate to agree, OLL, but it looks like it's the only way to govern today.

I call it government via the rear-view mirror. It's really tough nowadays to be forward-looking and vote the way conscience and plain old intelligence - not the kind Bush refers to, he ain't got any - dictate. Those who have made a full-time career of "public service" (a misapplication of the English language if there ever was one) will crucify anybody who doesn't devote full-time to CYA.

[Dr.Phool]

35. Bring it On!!!!

[OldLeftieLawyer]

45. Please

That worked so well for Fuckface, it really should be retired.

This is an ugly - but smart - ploy by the Republicans to corner Democrats. Dems should just not show up.

[Renew Deal]

61. What does not showing up tell the nation?

It tells them that we are not willing to fight for what we believe and /or it's an attempt to marginalize Murtha in the Democratic party. What do the republicans expect us to do?

[electropop]

153. READ IT and if it is a demand to pull out, vote for it.

We need to stop hiding behind Mommy's skirt and start being Democrats again!!!

[aquart]

8. Yes. But we're only smart intermittently.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

11. No Democrat

will get caught voting on this one. Watch. It's a nasty little public relations ploy.

Ugly.

[blm]

38. Exactly - It's a vicious game because GOPs can't handle honest debate.

.

[ourbluenation]

3. well well well...this will seperate the men from the boys, at it were...nt

[OldLeftieLawyer]

4. Bastards

All the Democrats should go home right now. It's another Terri Schiavo scenario.

Filthy bastards.

[ananda]

5. Good!

Well over 60% of Americans support withdrawal. LEt's just see who's where.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

9. No, no, no

It's a Republican ploy to rope in Democrats and it's smart, but Democrats should stay the hell away from it.

Remember that Terri Schiavo thing? That's what this will become.

[Renew Deal]

17. The pukes lost on Schiavo.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

19. That's right

And they have to live it down.

So, too, will any Democrat who gets caught in this trap.

[koopie57]

73. I agree with Old Leftie Lawyer

A yes vote is stupid and short-sighted, vote no and they will scream that the dems are for the war after all. Stay away, when asked why respond that it was recognized as another on of the republicans attempts at avoiding the real issues and a stupid stunt. After five years of this we don't have time to play anymore. Serious work needs to be done.

[mazzarro]

113. Who will write the resolution?

If Rep. Murtha will write the resolution then Democrats should all stand firm and vote for it since Murtha has obviously the experience and expertise in military affairs to have figured out the intricacies inherent in the issue. However if the rethugs are going to cobble up a slanted and disingenuous resolution, then Democrats should be on the floor denouncing it as a sham and not reflective of Rep. Murtha's thoughts and plans for which democrats have decided not participate in a sham vote by abstentions.
I don't think democrats should dodge and not fight for this somehow.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

160. Listen,

you don't write any meaningful legislation in a matter of hours. Language is vital, and it takes a whole lot of time. Legislative drafting is a very specific and complicated art.

This isn't a resolution.

It's an attempt to neutralize what Jack Murtha did yesterday. The Democrats should call it out for the cheap shot at our troops that it is.

Talk about "playing politics with lives"!!!

[bananas]

6. Can someone post the capitol hill phone number? n/t

[Sapphire Blue]

16. Capitol toll-free number: 1-800-426-8073

[bananas]

27. Thank you. n/t

[leftstreet]

10. Will the resolution detail Murta's idea of redeployment?

I thought not.

Politics as usual.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

14. Ignore them

Ignore them and let it disappear.

This distraction is designed only to try to deflect attention from what Jack Murtha did yesterday.

Democrats cannot buy into it. They should vote with their feet, and split.

[leftstreet]

20. Absolutely! Any Dem who falls for this is beyond stupid.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

23. Oh, thank you

I thought I was the only seasoned vet here.

Whew ............

[Renew Deal]

28. You support an endless war.

At least that's what you are advocating.

[TayTay]

41. That's wrong. Just plain wrong.

OLL does not believe in an endless war. He is trying to advocate against a bad political move that will come back and bite the Dems in the ass.

Remember the repub mantra, confuse, confuse, confuse. That's what they want to do here. We do not yet have the consensus for this vote. It's a trick, designed to make Dems look bad.

I agree. Dems should just go home.

****************************8

Sorry, finger slip. I usually do gender-neutral. That will teach me to post on an empty stomach. Sigh! (I'm on vacation next week, guess I need it.)

No good defense goes unpunished. (Oddly true, btw.)

[Renew Deal]

46. How do Dems protect themselves?

Vote unanimously. That's not what the pukes expect. They expect us to fold.

[Blue_In_AK]

48. OLL is a "she" by the way

[OldLeftieLawyer]

57. SEE?

And, in case you don't believe me, here's my latest Official Portrait:

[Blue_In_AK]

102. My, you are a lovely one, OLL.

:rofl:

[blindpig]

135. So,

how did you like Havana?:P

[OldLeftieLawyer]

156. If you think that's a cigar,

you're wrong.

heh heh heh..........

:woohoo:

[OldLeftieLawyer]

50. I love "ignore"

Thanks for that spirited defense, Tay Tay. I have recently learned of the "Ignore" feature, and it's remarkably rewarding. Especially when I find mirror comments like yours.

Thanks. And, by the way, OldLeftie's a girl lawyer...........

:woohoo:

[Renew Deal]

55. You like it

Because a disagreement would be just too hard to deal with. That's how the white house works these days.

[TayTay]

My apologies

I was recently told that TayTay sounded male, and I am but a girlie girl myself. Sigh!

I usually post gender-neutral. I must have vacation-brains. (I'm off next week.)

Mea culpa. :blush:

[OldLeftieLawyer]

66. No, you're a girl - I knew that

We know.

Have a GREAT holiday ! ! !

[Renew Deal]

30. What do the pukes expect?

They expect the dems to crack with only a couple people voting for it. Send a unanimous message. It's much more powerful and it shows us standing for something.

[Renew Deal]

21. Bullshit.

The smart thing to do is vote for it unanimously. Anything less than almost a party line vote would be bad.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Renew Deal]

37. You don't know the wording

and you advocate not voting for something. This could give the dems the chance to define themselves as an alternative.

Go ahead and ignore the truth. You have already shown that you don't have the guts to fight for what you believe in; unless you are pro war?

[seabeyond]

63. bush too blindly ran into battle. didnt behoove him . i am with

the lawyer chick, wink

insist on dems voting on something you havent seen. wow

[Renew Deal]

68. So you insist on them not voting for something you haven't seen?

Isn't that hypocritical?

[seabeyond]

74. i want to see hear read and listen, before i decide if ALL dems had

better support or else.

i mean first thing i hear is repug doing an up and down vote. they are doing it cause they think this is what democracy is, they are doing it to shut dems up. the democrats have been too loud.

so

before i decide the dems ought to cotton to what repugs what them to do, i want to read, listen and think about what is being put on the table to vote on

[Renew Deal]

80. I think the dems have to be loud too.

And of course, if the petition is bad, the dems should vote against it. It depends on wording. But what are the pukes trying to accomplish? They are trying to marginalize and isolate Murtha. How do you combat that? Stand together. This can be the defining moment for the Democratic party going into 2006, if we stand together. We can the public who agrees with us BTW an alternative.

[ClassWarrior]

93. What about the Dems and Murtha holding a press conference to denounce...

...the Radical RW for playing arrogant games with our childrens' lives?

Isn't that standing together? Couldn't that be a defining moment?

NGU.

[seabeyond]

101. classwarrior, i think that is class. yes. i think that is another

reasoned way of handling this.

[FreedomAngel82]

71. It is totally propoganda

So they can use it against the democrats. Reid and the rest need to just close the senate or something.

[Renew Deal]

76. This is in the House

Pelosi perhaps?

[bananas]

34. What? I'm about to call my congressman - bug out or vote to bug out?

Should he bug out of the vote, or vote to bug out?

[OldLeftieLawyer]

39. He should not show up

and that's what the leadership will counsel, I'm certain.

[Renew Deal]

43. That's bold vision.

:thumbsup:

[bananas]

130. my rep is Republican

should I tell him to vote yes,
or should I tell him not to vote?

[OldLeftieLawyer]

158. My sweet friend,

you don't know what the resolution says or what its effects will be.

Legislative drafting is a fine art, and the notion that someone would prostitute anything as serious as the war in this matter is offensive as hell. I know you know this.

Tell him to object to the Republicans playing last-minute politics with something as serious as our military in Iraq. Then tell him you agree with Jack Murtha.

You go!

[zanne]

123. It's going to be a fake resolution.

I don't even think that's legal. If they do this, Democrats could pull this stunt, too.

[wookie294]

12. I'm not afraid to say I want to cut-n-run

I like the word "Surrender." I fully support surrender, cut-n-run and withdrawal. Surrender, in the defense of withdrawing from unnecessary wars, is no vice!

[blm]

15. There are no details in Murtha's plan to vote on. What can the GOPs offer?

Murtha's plan was deliberately vague and GOPs want to construct a bill out of it?

[wookie294]

22. Murtha wants troops out in 6 months

Doesn't seem vague to me at all.

[blm]

33. Yes it was. He said REDEPLOY the troops NEAR Iraq. He deliberately

was vague to push for DEBATE, but GOPs don't want real debate so they use vicious smears and gamesmanship.

[wookie294]

44. Dems should vote YES

I don't care if it's a ploy by Repubs. Vote yes!

[seabeyond]

69. you dont care if it shuts up the dems and all the progress they

have made in getting this issue out on the news. you dont care if it causes a door to be slammed shut on the dems movement....

i do

[Renew Deal]

72. What do the republicans expect us to do on such a vote?

[seabeyond]

79. they expect the dems wont be able to go with it, because there

has not been adaquit time to discuss and work together forming a plan. so then you are going ot have dems back up against the wall, and the mess with iwrs is going to pale comparing to this.

we arent rushing into this before thanksgiving vacation. they want an up and down vote, let the dems get together and put soemthing together to vote on...... that can be presented inunity. how grown ups do things

[Renew Deal]

81. If the Dems can force a vote on their own resolution,

that would be effective too. But I'm not sure if they can do that.

[seabeyond]

85. so they cant vote on their words, they have to vote on what repugs

decide they are saying. you dont have a problem with that. i do.

repugs keep telling me who i the dem is. fuck that shit. i will tell the repugs who i am. the dems will say what their plan is. not the repugs writing it up

[Renew Deal]

88. Do you know if we can get an alternative resolution?

I don't believe that we can. The wording not withstanding.

[seabeyond]

98. look it is not a rush job vote. period. this isn't to be decided today

that is not how you make decisions, that is not how you run a business cannot be how you do a party or a nation

they want an up and down vote fine. get it together let people take it home think about it talk about it see if it can be made better. the right way

to grab what the repugs hand to us is foolish. there is not a single reason to trust them. but i know i certainly cant argue with you about this with any kinds of intelligence since you and i dont know what the repugs are putting up to vote on.

i wish you knew the same thing

[Renew Deal]

133. I know something

That's how to fight back. You think the pukes are going to let you go home, ask you mom and come back to vote the next day? The article doesn't read that way. We need to act from a position of strength. What is our strength here? Unanimity. but i know i certainly cant argue with you about this with any kinds of intelligence since you and i dont know what the repugs are putting up to vote on.

[seabeyond]

145. can we for once with this administration, not reduce all of us to a

bunch of kids. what does mama have to do with this. seriously suggesting we are going to have grownups adopt childish roles. who gives a fuck about go ask mama bullshit. i am not going to misstep cause bushco inevidately reduces itself to childish behavior. no

i will allow the dems to be grown up

i dont know what they are going ot do. maybe they are in room now, all deciding to vote for it. cool. i will support

maybe murtha is deciding to make a statement and have dems back him, cool

maybe they are deciding on another option in dealing iwth this, there may be a cool with that too

i am not going to make a statement, if they dont do this....... the are

prowar
cowards
want slaughter

i am not going to make such a statement.

[seabeyond]

181. did repugs change muthra's words? do we still want dems to

vote for what the repugs put out. i am not sure. had kids to pick up and all. missed it.

[thefloyd]

24. Democrats better show and vote

If Murtha one of the more conservative democrats can come out so can the rest of Democrats

[Junkdrawer]

26. Murtha should vote against it and rail that this was not his plan...

"How dare you chicken shit chicken hawks put words in my mouth"....

[OldLeftieLawyer]

32. YES!

And what's great is that I can honestly imagine him doing it - in nicer language, of course, but with his massive hands in his pockets, his rage and frustration barely concealed.

I do like that man. I really do.

[blm]

40. DING, DING, DING, We have a winner.

Call his office with that, Junk.

[leftstreet]

53. EXACTLY!

[Marr]

60. That's right- this is a job for Murtha.

[seabeyond]

70. good good good, that would be good. oh that would

be kick ass. i like

[ProSense]

77. You are exactly right! Republicans do not decide the Democrats agenda. n/t

[Jon8503]

31. Just goes to show you how the republicans play politics with our

military's lives. Unless the vote really counts toward a resolution to withdraw, the dems should tell them to go to hell, they don't play games with our troops lives. No symbolic vote.

[seabeyond]

49. you had better hope there is a way dems can speak out on this

cause regardless of your go get em belief and ALL dems should be behind this bill, this could be a huge mess.

this is not a good thing.

the dems need time to process and look at and see. to rush in is to draw a line that may not be ready to go over. give ammunition to cheney that we dont want him to have

i think there are some on this board that simplifies it to the point of it not being reality.

the repugs did this for a reason. and it is to set a trap. and for dems to say you for for it or else, is falling right into the trap

dems HAVE done well. i hope they can untie on what to do with this, and they make the right move. i dont know what the move is. i will wait to see how this plays out before i decide what ALL dems had better do

[wookie294]

62. What's the trap?

Repubs will offer a bill to withdraw troops in 6 months. Sounds good to me. Dems should vote on it.

[Marr]

52. What do you suppose the Republicans would do if offered the choice to

vote on a resolution to keep US troops in Iraq for the next 50 years?

It'd be the same kind of political gamesmanship, and I expect most Republicans would either ignore the resolution or mock it outright. I have to agree with OldLeftyLawyer here- the smart move is to ignore it.

[TahitiNut]

56. "The Congress shall have power ... to declare war ..."

I think it's about time that Congress supports and defends the Constitution and ceases their "cut and run" from their responsibility in such matters.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

64. First,

we need to get that fucking War Powers Act declared unconstitutional - which it is, on its face.

http://tinyurl.com/5tzu

Since 1973, we've had that goddamn albatross giving Presidents authority that's specifically granted to Congress. Drives me nuts.

[TahitiNut]

78. SEC. 5. (c)

Notwithstanding subsection (b), at any time that United States Armed Forces are engaged in hostilities outside the territory of the United States, its possessions and territories without a declaration of war or specific statutory authorization, such forces shall be removed by the President if the Congress so directs by concurrent resolution.

This could, in fact, be an opportunity to do so. It wouldn't take a majority to raise such an issue to SCOTUS. Furthermore, if the House GOP bleedership introduces such a measure, but not a Joint Resolution, then the Constitutionality of such a measure (not being in compliance with the WPA) could be challenged and the whole ball of wax could be brought to the fore.

So, rather than "cut and run" from a GOP 'ploy,' I'd rather see the House Democrats (along with some GOP moderates) escalate the question vis-a-vis both the War Powers Act and the Constitutionality of the House's actions.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

94. Exactly

Something in the back of my tired old brain tells me this challenge has been mounted, and defeated, but I'm not absolutely certain.

First, we get out of Iraq.

Then, we take Congress.

Then, we take the White House.

Then, we go after this fucking Act.

(Ever hear Leonard Cohen's song, "First We Take Manhattan"? That's what this post looks like ..............)

[understandinglife]

143. How about demanding a binding resolution on Murtha's proposal, today.

??

And, how about coupling that with an effort to force a vote on the repeal of the War Powers Act, today.

Bring all of this into focus for the American people.

The Dems certainly have everyone's attention - how about crystallizing the entire issue and convert Hastert's stunt into a devastating exposition of their continued willingness to kill Americans and Iraqis instead of facing the reality of the colossal failure of Bush and the neoconsters.


Peace.

[understandinglife]

86. Yes!!! MOST DEFINTELY.

Peace.

[oasis]

58. Good. Bring on the debate--complete with the lies that led us into war.

:woohoo:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

65. Well, now we'll see who is pro/anti-war for real.

My rep's vote will decide if I vote for him.

[seabeyond]

82. bullshit. THIS is exactly why the repug are doing THIS

they can get the dems to be attacking each other again. over simplifying it with "we will see who is pro or anti war"

BULLSHIT

you fell right into what the repugs want

[Renew Deal]

84. I agree with you to a point.

I think they are trying to divide us. Unanimous opposiiton would counter that.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

89. Why should the anti-war dems be attacking each other?

Oversimplifying what? Simple vote. You want to end the occupation? Yes. You want to continue the slaughter? No.

You fell right into what the repugs want. To force the VichyDems to vote against the people and show their hypocrisy.

[seabeyond]

103. You want to continue the slaughter

it isnt that black and white. i havent even read the dudes proposal yet but i do know it is different from kerry's, now some may feel kerry's is the better approach i dont know. i dont know that the dems have done enough thinking to know yet either

but neither of those proposals are pro war

what if a dem doesnt like murtha's approach as much as kerry's approach, and they dont want to vote for murtha, they want to vote for kerry

but then you the dem say,....... you are either for slaughter, or not

you are either for war or not

you have us in a box

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

118. That's right. You're either for war or not.

As we all discovered with Kerry's vote for the war. And, now he's still playing politics by offering half-measures. OUT NOW!! What in the hell is so difficult about that. Most of the people want us out. What point is there in continuing a lost war?

[seabeyond]

122. murtha isnt out now. he is 6 months. must be for the war. the

coward

[druidity33]

142. 6 months=out now

logistically speaking, i think it would actually take six months or more to remove that many troops and that much equipment "safely". In other words... it aint gonna get quicker than that!

[ProSense]

97. So right! Why would anyone advocate Democrats attacking each other?

How is this a sign of strength?

[thefloyd]

75. Lefty Lawyer has a point

No one knows what the resolution says. However, if Democrats find out and the amendment is 6 months, all democrats should vote yes.

[Catrina]

137. This was what Hannity challenged Gen. Clark with last night

He was frothing at the mouth about Murtha's statements yesterday. He said to Gen. Clark 'I'm challenging Democrats to ask for an up or down vote on this' ~ so the Republicans are once again using the military for political purposes and now they make decisions based on what a TV talking head tells them to do???


What they see is the loss of support for this war ~ and they're willing to play games with the lives of the troops rather than deal with what has become an albatross around Bush's neck.

I agree that Murtha should be all over television condemning this Hannity game adopted by the useless Republicans in Congress because they have no plans for this war, other than playing with the lives of our troops for their own vile political purposes.

He made such an impression on people. Friends called me last night to ask if I had seen him. His sincerity was unmistakable and people reacted to it. They are sooooooo scared of this man ~

[OldLeftieLawyer]

159. They're scared of smart, strong, knowledgeable people

Clark's a dream. I just love the guy, but he's a diplomat and a soldier, not a politician.

My current dream ticket is Clark/Murtha. Murtha's such a grand old pol, he'd show Clark how to handle it all.

It would be brilliant, that team..............

[Catrina]

168. Couldn't agree more!!

Two honest men, both with enough courage to be there on the battlefield, unlike the cowards currently sending people to die for their own greedy, selfish purposes.

I like that suggestion.

I think all the Democrats should abstain from this vote in protest of the Republicans playing political football with the lives of our troops and with NO plan to end this war.

That would give them lots of TV time to slam this administration ~ a protest against the lies, against the lack of a Republican strategy for this war, a protest against the loss of life. And they should demand then, an up or down vote on a deadline for a plan to get out by the Bush administration. If they don't produce one, then Congress cuts off all funding. Put the ball in their park.

They then will be responsible for the lack of funding because they have no plan, or rather, they do, they're just not telling the American people that they have no intention of leaving.

And Democrats should use quotes from before the war, ie 'This war will be over in months, no weeks' ~ then they should slam them for mis-leading the American people.

[bridgit]

87. republicans have used our noble armed forces as pawns in an ignoble...

scheme for globalization, hegemony & war profiteering; it would only seem right-wing that they would fail to stop such antics now :thumbsdown:

[kpete]

91. These are their motives:

I posted this earlier after hearing it on CNN
(Forgive my transcription)
Its all over the place now, but it seems clear that embarassing the Dems is their intention.


House republicans privately considering:

Calling Murtha's Bluff
Calling this up on the House Floor
See whether Dems are serious about this
Put people on record
only 30-35 liberals will support it

They think it will embarass Democrats
& be a shot in the arm to republicans
privately considering bring up his resolution if not today, then after Thanksgiving.

Just heard on CNN

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

96. What would be "embarassing" by opposing this lousy war?

It's time the Dems proudly stood against the war and occupation.

[Karmadillo]

92. No! No! Don't vote! Run away! That's exactly how we gained control

of the White House. Running away from issues works. That's how we gained control of Congress. Running away is the way to go. That's how we gained the right to determine the composition of the Supreme Court for generations to come. Run away! Run away! A vote to withdraw from Iraq? Say nothing. Slink away. Later, if the war turns out to be as disastrous as it looks right now, we can say we were for withdrawal or we can say we were lied to or we can say whatever looks like it might work for us. If, on the other hand, the war turns out OK, we can say we were for staying the course. That's the way to win elections. Wait. Watch. Stay silent at all costs. That's why we're top dog. Woof!

[ClassWarrior]

99. Who said run away? And what's your agenda in distorting people's words?

NGU.

[Renew Deal]

104. Right here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5394253&mesg_id=5394431

Don't show up. Don't have a record.

[ClassWarrior]

109. Done unanimously, that's taking a stand. That's standing for values.

And you didn't answer my second question...

NGU.

[Renew Deal]

112. The second question wasn't directed at me.

I don't "run away" is a distortion.

[ClassWarrior]

119. My bad. And I don't believe you're so stupid that you think...

..."run away" is any less a distortion than "cut and run."

NGU.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

110. Read the posts. A lot seem to want to cave.

Oooh! Oooh! The Dems might be "embarassed" by follwing Murtha's, and the peoples' lead.

[ClassWarrior]

111. Nice framing. I ask the same question...

What's your agenda in distorting people's words?

NGU.

[Renew Deal]

116. That's their agenda.

What do you think the pukes are going to say after we not vote/run away/go off the record/whatever?

That's what they'll say about us.

[ClassWarrior]

124. First of all, why do you have to stick your nose into everyone else's...

...discussion? What's YOUR agenda?

Second, I don't give a flying fuck what they say about us. As a matter of fact, the more lies they spin, the more tangled they get. So let 'em go for it.

NGU.

[Renew Deal]

127. I'm confused

Which discussion? The one between Murtha and the Republicans? Murtha and the country? The repubs and their masters?

My agenda is to post on DU.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

169. You rock!

I don't even know to whom you're responding - it's someone on my Ignore list - but your words are gorgeous, as are the sentiments they express.

Rock on, please.

:woohoo:
:applause:

[ClassWarrior]

179. Oh, you just like it when I talk nasty...

:evilgrin:

NGU.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

180. True,

but if you wore The Hat, well, you know .................

:loveya:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

128. So, where's the "distortion"?

You asked "who is advocating running away". I answered. There's a lot of people here who are whining about the Dems having to make a stand for a change, and are advocating not voting.

[ClassWarrior]

139. And you're going to make me pretend you're stupid and have to explain...

...that not voting provides a stellar opportunity to "make a stand for change" while stepping around the honking legislative bear trap that Fat Denny thinks he's setting here.

In fact, it's an even bigger opportunity to take stand than an ordinary vote, because it's TV-ready conflict.

NGU.

[Karmadillo]

183. Whose words did I distort?

nt

[Ksec]

100. If the Dems vote it down they are cowards

Simple as that. Time to show some balls Dems.

[kpete]

105. Ed Henry just confirmed this on CNN 12:00 pst

Update on CNN
Murtha's resolution or "some form of it" (?)
Republicans want Murtha on the record.
Replicans will send a message to the troops that they will not retreat.
Democrats - this is a PR stunt by republicans

[OldLeftieLawyer]

163. Oh, PERFECT

The Republicans are "calling out" Jack Murtha?

Pass the popcorn...............

:woohoo:
:applause:

[seabeyond]

107. simple as that, if you dont vote my way, you are coward, bullshit

[Ksec]

108. exactly.

They want out and if they cant admit it then that shows true moral cowardice.

[seabeyond]

114. what a concept, what if there are other dems that figure there is a

better way to get out than this. oh no....... lets not allow that, this is all or nothing. my way or you are a coward. vote for this or you are pro war

bullshit

i have been listening to bush adn repugs tell me how i am suppose to do things or i am not american, patriotic a christian. bullshit

[Ksec]

125. Well lets put it this way then

If they really do want out and they vote against their real wishes thats what THEY are gonna say, and THEY may have a point.

Its just like most Dems being afraid to say bash is a liar. Why ? Everyone knows he is and they cant say it? Didja ever wonder why so many people think the Dems are weak? How about speaking the truth on how you feel? Thats were the "weak " comes from. Fear of being smeared by the right is no excuse to hold your tongue. I say Fk them.

[ClassWarrior]

157. Agreed. They SHOULD speak up. They SHOULDN'T fall into RW traps.

It's the Kobayashi Maru. We need the Dems to be Captain Kirk.

NGU.

[goodhue]

146. darn right

eom

[PRETZEL]

106. Copy of Rep. Murtha's comments

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05322/608402.stm

<snip>
"My plan calls:

To immediately redeploy U.S. troops consistent with the safety of U.S. forces.

To create a quick reaction force in the region.

To create an over-the-horizon presence of Marines.

To diplomatically pursue security and stability in Iraq.

<snip>

This is really only what I believe bo be the main points. I haven't read the resolution in total, but if this is what he calls for then I support this plan and really have no problem having the resolution brought to the floor.

It may seem like a political stunt but I think it's time that people start getting on record for their stances, on both sides of the issue. this resolution has (at least in my opinion) no chance of making it through the Senate let alone be enacted but I don't think that's the main point. I think it's about time for our elected officials to start putting their money where they're mouth is.

[blm]

115. It's not drastically different than Kerry's as people are assuming

it's just not as detailed.

Kerry Introduces Strategy for Success in Iraq Act in United States Senate

Plan Would Bring Home 20,000 Troops After Iraq Elections, Demands Benchmarks for Success

Washington, D.C. -- This afternoon, Senator John Kerry introduced in the Senate his plan to succeed in Iraq and bring the vast majority of our combat troops home in a reasonable timeframe tied to specific, responsible benchmarks to transfer responsibility to Iraqis – beginning with the draw down of 20,000 U.S. troops after successful Iraqi elections in December. These additional troops are in Iraq only for the purpose of providing security for the upcoming elections. If they remain in Iraq after that benchmark is achieved, it only exacerbates the sense of American occupation.

"We are entering a make-or-break six month period in Iraq. We need to be taking action now if we are ever going to bring our troops home within a reasonable timeframe from an Iraq that's not permanently torn by irrepressible conflict," Kerry said. “We cannot pull out precipitously or merely promise to stay ‘as long as it takes. There is a way forward that gives us the best chance both to salvage a difficult situation in Iraq, and to save American and Iraqi lives.”

Kerry's legislation, the Strategy for Success in Iraq Act, lays out a comprehensive new strategy to complete the mission in Iraq and bring our troops home. Its goal is to undermine the insurgency by simultaneously pursing both a political settlement and the draw down of American forces linked to specific, responsible benchmarks. If followed, the process will be completed in 12-15 months.

Kerry’s plan calls for:

• The U.S. to begin a phased draw down of American troops as a series of military and political benchmarks is met, starting with a reduction of 20,000 troops over the holidays as the first benchmark –the successful completion of the December elections – is met.

• The U.S. to immediately make clear that we do not want permanent military bases in Iraq, or a large combat force on Iraqi soil indefinitely.

• The Administration to immediately give Congress and the American people a detailed plan for the transfer of military and police responsibilities on a sector by sector basis to Iraqis so the majority of our combat forces can be withdrawn -- ideally by the end of next year.

• The Bush administration to prod the new Iraqi government to ask for a multinational force to help protect Iraq’s borders until a capable national army is formed. Such a force, if sanctioned by the United Nations, could attract participation by Iraq's neighbors and countries like India and would be a critical step in stemming the tide of insurgents and money into Iraq, especially from Syria.

• The Pentagon to alter the deployment of American troops, keeping Special Operations forces pursuing specific intelligence leads and putting the vast majority of U.S. troops in rear guard, garrisoned status for security backup. We do not need to send young Americans on search and destroy missions that invite alienation and deepen the risks they face.

• The President to put the training of Iraqi security forces on a six month wartime footing and ensure that the Iraqi government has the budget to deploy them.

• The Bush administration to accept long standing offers by Egypt, Jordan, France and Germany to do more training.

• The administration to immediately call a conference of Iraq’s neighbors, Britain, Turkey and other key NATO allies, and Russia to implement a strategy to bring the parties in Iraq to a sustainable political compromise that includes mutual security guarantees among Iraqis.

• Iraq’s Sunni neighbors to set up a reconstruction fund specifically for the majority Sunni areas to show them the benefits of participating in the political process. • The President to appoint a special envoy to bolster America’s diplomatic efforts.

• The U.S. to commit to a new regional security structure that includes improved security assistance programs and joint exercises.

• The U.S. to jumpstart our lagging reconstruction efforts by providing the necessary civilian personnel to do the job, standing up civil-military reconstruction teams throughout the country, streamlining the disbursement of funds to the provinces, expanding job creation programs for Iraqis, and strengthening the capacity of government ministries.

“We must send this critical signal to the Iraqi people - that we do not desire permanent occupation - and that Iraqis themselves must fight for Iraq. History shows that guns alone do not end an insurgency,” Kerry added.

Senior American commanders and officials have said the large U.S. military presence in Iraq feeds the insurgency. General George Casey, the top American military commander in Iraq, recently told Congress that our large military presence “feeds the notion of occupation” and “extends the amount of time that it will take for Iraqi security forces to become self-reliant.” Richard Nixon’s Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird, breaking a thirty year silence, recently wrote, ''Our presence is what feeds the insurgency, and our gradual withdrawal would feed the confidence and the ability of average Iraqis to stand up to the insurgency."

# # #

[Sydnie]

117. No-neck Weeble Hastert just said that they want to do this today n/t

[ProSense]

120. Where is the Republican plan to win? Put that up for a vote. n/t

[Lexingtonian]

121. vote "present" en masse

I really don't know why they don't do this more.

[kpete]

129. My question is about the Repubs!!!

I guess my question is not so much what the Democrats will do (I hope they take Murtha's lead and I think Murtha will lead). My question is what will the republicans do. I think alot of them would like to be out before the elections. This is the truly fascinating story to me. I think they do what they are told to do. It's not like they have minds of their own. But how would Repubs vote if the could speak their mind?

[ProSense]

126. Actually, Republicans are in so much trouble, Democrats can vote however

they want to.

[raysr]

131. Is this in the Senate or the House?

Nevermind. Rep. Murtha. Duh

[seabeyond]

132. this vote will stick with them. not giving them much chance to

create compromise or anything. the most extreme proposal so far is the one they are asking dems to vote on.

anyway. i think i will stop now, and watch how this is handled. if nothing else it iwll be interesting. i just have tough time with everyone had better vote for it or else....... if dem doesnt vote for this, pro war......

jsut not an absolute type person

but, you are right, repugs are in so much trouble, which leads me to nt being trusting, thinking more the caged lion kinda thing

[Renew Deal]

138. How do you know which proposal it is.

You just said you didn't know anything about it? Did someone post it or did you get a call from Capital Hill?

Abandoning Murtha and the Democratic party will stick with us more. it will show once again that we won't fight for what we believe in.

[ProSense]

140. Yup! Remember Schiavo?

Republicans are not showing much smarts or they're desperate.

[druidity33]

149. yeah it's a dirty trick...

and we shouldn't go along with it... but, ooooooooohhhh, it'd feel good if there was DEBATE on the floor and a contentious vote. I want to see fire again! More shouts of SHAME! I listened to Murtha's speech and he convinced me. I had thought about the mess we'd be leaving if we just pulled out... but how do we know if it'd be worse? 80% is a strong number (the percentage of Iraqis polled who thought the US should JUST LEAVE). We should have had time to write our reps en masse and say SUPPORT THIS! That's what pisses me off about this "quick vote", no time to build a strong coalition...
we all want the same thing, just disagree on how to go about it....

[seabeyond]

152. no time to build a strong coalition...

we all want the same thing, just disagree on how to go about it....

exactly. this is what i was trying to say. lots other dems may want the same thing, just not this way. i dont know. but repugs take it out of dems hands to do this responsibly. and to do it the fucked up bushco way.

we gotta say stop. this is not how responsible adults solve problems

[OldLeftieLawyer]

161. Welcome to DU!

And, you're dead right on - this is just a Republican show, with no substance, trying to get the attention of the American people away from Jack Murtha.

[mtnester]

134. Oh God what I would give to see them in mass, stand up, turn their backs

and walk out while Murtha troops with them speaking in his loud and proud voice - "shame, shame SHAME for turning the right thing to do into a dirty political trick. Our troops and the Iraqi people deserve better than that!" With the rest of the Dem crowd murmuring "shame, shame, shame..." as they walked out with him...then pause at all the doors, blocking them, and chanting shame shame shame shame, until the voting is over or the gavel falls, standing their ground and chanting, FORCING the Repubs to have to push past them live on CSpan...

I can dream.

[kpete]

136. New from AP

House GOP Seeks Quick Vote on Iraq Pullout
By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer

Friday, November 18, 2005

(11-18) 11:46 PST WASHINGTON, (AP) --


House Republicans sought a showdown Friday with Democrats on a proposal by one of their most senior members to force an end to the U.S. deployment of troops in Iraq.


Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., offered the resolution demanding a pullout. The GOP-run House was expected to reject it — and make a prominent statement about where Congress stands on Iraq — as the chamber scurried toward a Thanksgiving break.


"We'll let the members debate it and then let them vote on it," said Rep. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., the acting majority leader.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/11/18/national/w112413S14.DTL

[Ksec]

141. and then theyll say we voted to keep the troops in Iraq

as their constant talking point for the next 2 yrs. Just like they do with the vote to give the monkey the power to invade and conquer

[goodhue]

144. Excellent.

I hope GOP does this and my congress person better darn well vote for it. There will be some Republicans who vote for it as well.

[kpete]

147. Ed Henry just said on CNN

That Murtha would be the ONLY speaker in this fight for the Dems.

Good tactic in my opinion. He can take them all on!!! GO MURTHA!!!

Update: Rep. J.D. Hayworth is the prime mover of this idea. AS of 2pm ET, House GOP leaders are mulling it over.

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2005/11/putting_dems_on.html

[PRETZEL]

151. Murtha speaking alone is ok

but he should have every member of the Dem's in their seats as a show of unity.

Actually if it's good old J.D. pushing for the vote on the Rep's side then this resolution may have a chance. J.D.'s about as dumb as they get.

[Turn CO Blue]

148. This thread is classic GD on DU! Somebody send this to Pelosi

Gotta love the passion on this thread, even if I don't understand where some people are coming from...

I say let's out-stunt their stunt - Pelosi should hold an en masse (all D-Reps present) press conference - and muy pronto.

[Gregorian]

150. Abstain?

It seems the Dems should call the repubs on their politicizing of this issue, and abstain from voting.

[kpete]

154. UPDATE: vote by 7 pm

November 18, 2005
GOP Tries To Call Murtha's "Bluff"
We can now confirm that there will be a "Murtha Vote" later this p.m. Speaker Dennis Hastert's spokesperson Ron Bonjean tells The Hotline that it's a "vote to send a message to our American troops that we believe in their mission of fighting terrorists and we must not retreat and defeat."

Angered by what he saw as House Dems "applauding but then backing off" Murtha's statement on 11/17, Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ) rose this a.m. at the House GOP Conference and suggested that they call for a vote to force Dems to show "where they stand to the American people," according to his spokesperson Larry VanHoose. Hayworth's call was met with what VanHoose described as "enthusiastic applause" from the rank-and-file GOP.

Pushing aside votes on extending the tax cuts, reauthorizing the Patriot Act and a long-awaited measure on federal flood insurance, the GOP leadership has turned Hayworth's idea into a resolution and will bring it to floor of the House for a vote by 7 pm, according to senior GOP leadership sources.

The question now is what Leader Pelosi and her caucus will do. After keeping her Dems in line on both major fiscal votes on 11/17, does she stick them all in cabs and push them off to DCA, IAD and BWI? Or will some Dems from conservative or military-heavy districts insist on staying and casting their "nays?"

CNN is reporting that Dems are planning on having just Murtha debate the resolution, but it remains to be seen how and if the rest of the caucus votes.



http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/

[understandinglife]

155. Pelosi needs to counter and bring a binding resolution to the floor ....

It's time for everyone truly to SUPPORT THE TROOPS AND GET THEM OUT OF THIS ILLEGAL (and now civil) WAR.


Peace.

[ThoughtCriminal]

162. Two can play at this game

I'm not real familiar with proceedure, but they should be able to deal with it by proposing some rational ammendments that the republicans would then have to go on record with.

[Alizaryn]

164. QUESTION ...

Can the Dems offer amendments to resolution?

[MadHound]

165. Well, I guess it is time for the Dems to demonstrate

That their latest showing of a spine is no fluke. Withdrawl of the troops ASAP is a position favored by the majority of Americans, so they can't use that excuse to wimp out.

Time for them to vote in unison to bring the troops home, and even though they will fail, they can use that club to beat the 'Pugs to death in '06 and '08.

[kpete]

167. Here's a draft of the resolution:

Here's a draft of the resolution:

Draft text of the expected resolution is attached and below.

H.Res. __

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately.

Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately.


Is this all?

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/

[More Than A Feeling]

170. Democrats need to reraise now that Republicans have called Murtha

Vote for the Resolution, if it is the language that Murtha wanted. The American people support leaving Iraq, whether now or in a year. This will show the American people that Democrats are for them, are willing to take up the mantle of leadership.

I support pulling out with all possible speed. If that is what this resolution is, I don't care who offered, I am for it. I am also for any Democrats who do the right thing, and support that as well.

[robbedvoter]

171. On now C-Span

[raysr]

172. I can't believe it

Charlie Rangle in favor of the resolution!!!!!!!!!!

[raysr]

174. I sent this thread to Pelosi.

[DanCa]

173. actually lets have a put or shut up vote but I do hate the phrase cut and

run. I want out to save american soldiers lives. Especially when it was a war based on lies.

[raysr]

175. Buzz word only.

I ask myself all the time, how long would Vietnam went on if we hadn't pulled out, 5 years more, 10?

[raysr]

176. Waxman up now, "Res a fake"

[Chi]

177. 'I hereby give my vote to Sgt. Ron Masters who lost both legs in Iraq

this september.
He told me he wanted me to vote Aye.'

Not sure it's doable, but it would sure work well in the media.

[DanCa]

178. True Dat (nt)

[raysr]

182. Caller on CSPAN, Repuke, only

good dem is Liebermann!!!!