defunding the war is "off the table"? & "not in the natl interest" is gone?

[ima_sinnic]

I can't find ANY information on something I thought I heard while channel surfing yesterday evening, that a watered-down "compromise" bipartisan nonbinding resolution was passed in the Senate with the key terms "not in the national interest" removed and also some provision that defunding would NOT happen.

But I see NOTHING about it after searching google, nobody's mentioned it here--WTF? was that a bad dream?

on edit: forgot to say: the whole "nonbinding resolution" thing is BS to begin with, some feel-good lip-service to the idea that Iraq is somehow "wrong" but with the power to do absolutely nothing except let the turd in the WH continue on his catastrophic atrocity--so I guess it doesn't matter anyway. go back to sleep, NOTHING has changed.

[papau]

1. "not in the natl interest" is gone - but "off the table" is new to me - the Warner

compromise that removed the idea that some Senators would be for an increase - just not this surge - has not been released - as far as I know.

[ima_sinnic]

2. NOT defunding was specifically mentioned as being included

--it was something about a "promise" of some sort that defunding would not be considered as an option, something like that.
btw, "off the table" was my own, that was not in their language re this bill.

[papau]

3. NOT defunding TROOPS is the Dem position - defunding war is an option - or so

I thought.

[ima_sinnic]

6. yes--WaPo has it front page: no defunding of troops

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/29/AR2007012900164.html?sub=AR

Senators Unite on Challenges to Bush's Troop Plan
Revised Warner Language That Protects Funds Is Embraced for Bipartisan Appeal

By Shailagh Murray and Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, February 1, 2007; Page A01

Democratic and Republican opponents of President Bush's troop-buildup plan joined forces last night behind the nonbinding resolution with the broadest bipartisan backing: a Republican measure from Sen. John W. Warner of Virginia.

Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) announced the shift, hoping to unite a large majority of the Senate and thwart efforts by the White House and GOP leaders to derail any congressional resolution of disapproval of Bush's decision to increase U.S. troop levels in Iraq by 21,500.

Although the original Democratic language was popular within the party, it had little appeal among Republicans. Warner's proposal drew support from both sides, and it was retooled last night to maximize both Democratic and Republican votes.

The revised resolution would express the Senate's opposition to the troop increase but would vow to protect funding for the troops. The resolution does not include the Democratic language saying the Bush plan is against the national interest, but it also drops an earlier provision by Warner suggesting Senate support for some additional troops. . . .

[Greeby]

4. Cutting off funds is something the Out Of Iraq Caucus is working for

How much support it has in the House is unclear, but sadly not one member of the Senate in the 109th Congress voted against war funds. Bernie Sanders obviously will, as he did before. And I think Sherrod Brown did in the House. Don't know about the new people though

[rodeodance]

5. I basically heard what you heard---and watered down it is----NOT to em-

barass the President seems to be the goal.

[ima_sinnic]

7. now that they've screwed around and passed something "nonbinding"

--I wonder if they would mind getting to work on something with some balls that is BINDING. Or is that a bit much too much to ask???

sheesh, don't rock the boat or anything ...

[MadHound]

8. And thus the war is going to grind on

Too scared of their own shadow, putting their careers ahead of lives, the Democrats are going to let this war continue to grind on for at least another two years, despite the fact that the American people gave them a mandate, no, a directive to end the war ASAP.

And people wonder why so many of us are disenchanted with Democratic politicians. Like other politicians they are putting their own careers ahead of the lives of soldiers and innocents. Disgusting.

The Dems had better well find some cojones quick, and get us the hell out of Iraq. If they need a spine transplant, well, Kucinich and Webb have got plenty to spare.

[papau]

11. funding what the troops need to survive is "putting their own careers ahead of the lives of soldiers

- like why?

Or is keeping troops out of wars the answer - in which case the question is why have troops?

[Evergreen Emerald]

9. here is the article

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16910856/

Again congress is about ready to abrogate their responsiblity and give up the power to stop this insanity.

WASHINGTON - Two senators — a Republican and a Democrat — leading separate efforts to put Congress on record against President Bush's troop buildup in Iraq joined forces Wednesday, agreeing on a nonbinding resolution that would oppose the plan and potentially embarrass the White House.

Sens. John Warner, R-Va., and Carl Levin, D-Mich., had been sponsoring competing measures opposing Bush's strategy of sending 21,500 more U.S. troops to the war zone, with Warner's less harshly worded version attracting more Republican interest. The new resolution would vow to protect funding for troops while keeping Warner's original language expressing the Senate's opposition to the buildup.

[ima_sinnic]

10. sheesh -- so they put all that effort & arm-twisting & back-patting

into a "nonbinding resolution."
big whoop.
full steam ahead, Yr. Imperial Fraudulency, hope we didn't inconvenience you or anything with our showboating.