Getbig Main Boards > Politics and Political Issues Board

Senate won't vote on objection to troop buildup

(1/1)

Dos Equis:
Down in flames. 

Senate won't vote on objection to troop buildup
POSTED: 7:11 p.m. EST, February 17, 2007
Story Highlights• NEW: McConnell says measure meaningless because it doesn't address funding
• NEW: Democrats fear vote on funding, Sen. Graham says
• Seven GOP senators join Democrats in 56-34 vote
• Democrats fail to muster 60 votes necessary to consider resolution

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Senate Democrats failed to garner the 60 votes they needed to consider a nonbinding resolution opposing President Bush's plan to send more troops to Iraq.

The vote was 56-34, with seven Republicans crossing the aisle to vote with senators who oppose the troop buildup.

The measure was identical to a nonbinding resolution the House passed Friday denouncing the plan to send 21,500 additional troops to Iraq.

"We are policing a civil war in Iraq," Sen. Charles Schumer, D-New York, said before the vote. "American troops should not be in the middle of that war."

He added, "The president's escalation is misguided, to put it kindly." (Watch Schumer say Democrats are calling the GOP's "bluff" )

The Saturday vote was a procedural decision on whether the Senate should move on to a final vote on a resolution that expresses opposition to Bush's plan.

Republicans pushed for an amendment by Sen. Judd Gregg, R-New Hampshire, that would address funding of the war, which they said would make the vote meaningful.

"This nonbinding resolution, as a practical matter, doesn't do anything, but was designed to try to disapprove of the new mission," Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, said after the vote. "Our view is you cannot discuss the new mission in Iraq without discussing funding for the troops." (Watch senators spar over the vote )

McConnell said the Senate should have considered another resolution, put forward by Republicans John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, which includes benchmarks to measure Iraqi progress toward security goals.

In a written statement after the vote, White House press secretary Tony Snow urged Congress to approve Bush's funding request for the military.

"It would enable the world's most capable military force to remain the most advanced in terms of training, equipment, doctrine and -- most importantly -- the quality of the men and women who serve," Snow said.

Graham said politics made Democrats afraid to allow a vote on funding the war.

"If you did have this vote, the left -- the radical left -- would eat every Democratic hopeful for president alive," Graham said. "That's why we're not having this vote. The hard left wants out of this war yesterday."

Senate Republicans succeeded earlier this month in blocking a vote on a similar resolution. Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada urged Senate Republicans to drop their procedural moves.

In the House, 17 Republicans joined Democrats on Friday in passing the two-sentence resolution. It expresses support for U.S. troops in Iraq but states that Congress "disapproves" of Bush's troop increase. (Full story)

On February 5, all but two GOP senators voted to block debate on the similar resolution. Saturday's vote saw five more GOP senators join the Democrats. (Full story)

They were Sens. John Warner of Virginia, Norm Coleman of Minnesota, Susan Collins of Maine, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Gordon Smith of Oregon, Olympia Snowe of Maine and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania.

"We support the president on the diplomatic aspects of his plan. We support the president on the economic aspects of his plan," Warner said.

"We only disagree with one portion of it: Mr. President, do you need 21,500 additional men and women of the armed forces in this conflict?" Warner said.

Sen. Carl Levin, a Michigan Democrat, backed the chance to vote on the resolution.

"If we believe plunging into Baghdad neighborhoods with more American troops will not increase chances of success, we are duty-bound to say so," Levin said.

. . .

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/17/iraq.senate/index.html

240 is Back:
I guess since they are 4 votes short, Bush should celebrate.

After all, 34 members out of 100 support him.

What a fucking sham this has become.  I'm ashamed that nincompoops like him, and you, have infiltrated my great republican party.  While you were giggling at Bush1 and putting Clinton signs in your yard, I was running school debates in support of Bush 1.  Today, you try to hijack MY party with this BS?

Nope.  Get your 7000 iraqi refugees, your warmongering and your civil rights violations, and get the fck out of my republican party beach bum.

hope this "heps".

Dos Equis:

--- Quote from: 240 is Back on February 17, 2007, 11:52:02 PM ---
What a fucking sham this has become.  I'm ashamed that nincompoops like him, and you, have infiltrated my great republican party.  While you were giggling at Bush1 and putting Clinton signs in your yard, I was running school debates in support of Bush 1.  Today, you try to hijack MY party with this BS?

Nope.  Get your 7000 iraqi refugees, your warmongering and your civil rights violations, and get the fck out of my republican party beach bum.

hope this "heps".


--- End quote ---

--- Quote ---Quote
December 16, 2006, 10:59:08 PM » Quote by 240: 

I'm a libertarian. 
--- End quote ---

 
 
 

Navigation

[0] Message Index