Why are they still debating a non-binding resolution?

[bif]

To protest sending the 21,500 troops to Iraq. The asshole has already deployed them. WTF is the point?

[Vincardog]

1. IT is a chance to go on the record You are either with the a$$hatts of agin them

The reThugs want to force the Democrats to cut funding so they (The reThugs) can say "You do not support the troops. AS IF supporting the troops includes giving them unlimited chances to die in an illegal occupation.

[ruiner4u]

2. its satire dont'cha know... n/t

[jobycom]

4. LOL! That's about right! nt

[jobycom]

3. It allows them to continue non-debating a binding one.

:shrug:

[rodeodance]

5. I believe they are Debating whether there will be a debate-or not.

[heidler1]

6. At this point the Dems should be using the Rep. obstruction of stopping

Bush's stupid prolong the war surge scheme while building additional disgust among the voters for 2008. The only threat that the Reps. worry about is losing their jobs. Sure enough that is exactly what the Dems are doing. It's tricky cutting funding, but if you first prove that we had to do it because the Reps. wouldn't listen, it will sell to the voters.