No time off for troops

Submitted by R. Neal on Thu, 2007/09/20 - 4:23am.

The Webb amendment that would have given troops more time at home between deployments was blocked by Senate Republicans.

Senate Democrats could not get enough votes for cloture to end a Republican filibuster of the bill.

Tennessee Sens. Alexander and Corker both voted against cloture, which is a vote against the amendment.

As Sven noted yesterday, Alexander had said just the day before that he was "studying" the amendment and might consider it.

But Alexander and Corker both decided to once again toe the Bush party line. Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska) said "The White House has been very effective of making this a loyalty test for the party."

Sens. Collins and Snowe of Maine, Coleman of Minnesota, Sununu of New Hampshire, and Smith of Oregon were the other Republicans who supported the troops, along with every Democrat.

( categories: )

Forty-four senators not

Forty-four senators not supporting our troops while proving their loyalty to the king. They should be ashamed.

Sven's picture
The Bloodsucker Caucus.

The Bloodsucker Caucus. These people are disgusting.

Sven's picture
Turning to the other side,

Turning to the other side, why wasn't this vote backed up with a national advertising campaign, or at least in targeted states?

I understand the Dems are under institutional restraints because of the thin margin in the Senate. But goddammit, where's the strategy? These votes seem to come out of nowhere, and fade into the background just as quickly. They aren't connected to any coherent message.

Terry Troll's picture
Because

The current leadership is idealogicly very sound but they don't have the first clue as to how to get down and dirty and play the political game. There is no Johnson or Fulbright to lead in the trenches anymore. Oh, wait, there are actually but there names are Rove, DeLay ...

Sven's picture
Oh. My. God. What the hell

Oh. My. God.

What the hell is the matter with these donkeys? It's like a party of Patty Hearsts.

Andy Axel's picture
They'll condemn MoveOn for a

They'll condemn MoveOn for a truthful ad about Petraeus, but heaven forfend that they censure the president for lying us into war, or vote no confidence on Alberto Gonzalez for leading the DOJ into a roost for Rove cronies.

"Don't be so meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeean."

What a load of tory, whining bitches.

____________________________

I'm a guy in a Reagan mask -- and I'm running for President!

Russ's picture
The DNC just lost a donor

The DNC just lost a donor because of this. From now on, all my national political contributions go straight to MoveOn.org, starting just a few minutes ago.



~Russ

Sven's picture
And, cue der preznit with

And, cue der preznit with the noogies:

President Bush reserved his most outraged tone at a White House press conference this morning for Democratic leaders whose misplaced allegiances, he said, prevented them from sufficiently denouncing a MoveOn.org ad that criticized Gen. David Petraeus.

Did these bozos never spend time on an elementary school playground? This is not rocket science, for chrissakes.

Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Andy Axel's picture
WANTED: Real estate,

WANTED:

Real estate, Polynesia. ISO a lava tube, preferably in move-in condition. Adequate oxygen and available water a plus. Used OK. Immediate relocation need.

____________________________

I'm a guy in a Reagan mask -- and I'm running for President!

It does seem...

that the Democrats are just playing at war opposition. I mean, for heaven's sake, an amendment to dictate troop rotation timing--this is small. (GWB, et al., must surely be in amused.) And the Democrats cannot even pull that off.

Is is almost like that as a whole the party is actually ambivalent about the war. I wonder why.

Could it be that the Democrats "just want to drive"?

I see a "light at the end of the tunnel." Unfortunately, it is on a locomotive. Only something dramatic happening in Iraq like was seen in Lebanon during the Reagan administration will move this thing off center where it seems to be stuck. Or so it seems.

Andy, anything I can do to

Andy, anything I can do to help you OUT of the U.S., please let me know.

Jerks, listen! The Dem's own the Congress and yet you can't pass a vote for any of the things you believe in. Don't blame anyone but YOUR leaders. I'll take any Republican leader before I would even spit on a Democrat leader. The Dems can pass any Bills they want; I thought that's what you wanted in your last "victory" of the house and senate. You can't even keep your own members from crossing over and voting with the Republicans.

Let's see, you couldn't pass the Immigration Bill, De-funding the War Bill, We don't support Iraq bill, the bring them home bill, the vacation military bill, and many others.

Don't blame Bush, the VP, or the Republicans! Don't forget, YOU have the majority.

Where should I send money for your one-way ticket, Andy.

Andy Axel's picture
Nice try

Who was it screaming, "Up or down vote! Up or down vote! Up or down vote! Up or down vote! Up or down vote! Up or down vote! Up or down vote! Up or down vote! Up or down vote! Up or down vote! Up or down vote!" on every issue last Congressional term?

Oh, right. The now obstructionist Republicans, who've rediscovered the filibuster.

Where should I send money for your one-way ticket, Andy.

First class from LA to Kuala Lumpur? You have that kind of jack?

I'd settle for a downpayment on my lava tube.

____________________________

I'm a guy in a Reagan mask -- and I'm running for President!

The Dems can pass any Bills

The Dems can pass any Bills they want

Can you count? In the Senate a bill can only pass if it's not filibustered. It takes 60 votes to cut off a filibuster. The Dems don't have 60 votes.

That said, they should pick a big issue (the troop rotation issue would have been a good one) and make the Rs really filibuster - not say they will, but actually do it. As in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington type filibuster.

I'd love to see some Republicans on the floor explaining why they wouldn't allow a vote on giving the troops they "support" adequate rest.

Such a filibuster couldn't be broken and it's not practical to make the Rs actually filibuster everything. But one strategically placed actual filibuster would make it abundantly clear to the country just who's obstructing the work in Congress.

And yes, even if a filibuster could be broken, Bush would just veto everything and it would be tough to find 67 votes to override a veto. Doesn't matter; it would make Bush have to justify all those vetoes.

P.S. BTW, those low Congressional approval ratings CBT was telling us about recently? Turns out that when you break down those #s, Republicans are significantly happier with Congress than Democrats. And that's precisely because Democrats aren't perceived as making things happen. It's time to make it clear who's keeping things from happening.

"The difficulty lies not so much in developing new ideas as in escaping from old ones." - John Maynard Keynes

Factchecker's picture
Thanks for not spitting

The Dems can pass any Bills they want.

No, they would have to be filibuster proof to do that, which they're not, and even w/o a filibuster Dumbya will never sign anything of theirs.

But thanks for being the day's idiot troll.

I just sent this petition back and got so further pissed that I sent MoveOn some cash. Now I feel better.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

Captcha
This question is used to make sure you are a human visitor and to prevent spam submissions.
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.