GOP Foils Dems' Bid to Repudiate Bush

Ahh!

::can't take yelling... so hard to read...::

...what?

I'm not even gonna try to read that. UNDERSTAND???

What I want to know is where those other 10 senators were at the time of this vote.

Care to elaborate?

If the debate is so useless, why are the Repugs fighting and undermining it with their lies? Perhaps if they had allowed the same debates before and after the war began, we would not be in the predicament we find ourselves.

How many more billions will be spent in this hell hole. Where is the oil money that was supposed to pay for this.

You right wingers need to understand that your credibility is minus zero. Do not think for a moment that our soldiers do not want to come home.

And they sure as hell did not VOLUNTEER to serve over and over in Iraq. If they knew then what they know now--that a lying, scheming, conniving bunch of CHICKENHAWKS would attack another country and send them back and forth--AND change the terms of their enlistments, many of them would not be in the VOLUNTEER military. Betcha...

Did you serve? Are you too old or too young? If you are under 42, have a criminal record, did not finish high school it is still not too late for you to sign up.

Still waiting for your credentials...

reactionary -- You are blind to reality. Every soldier in Iraq is a volunteer and enlisted after the war began.

Total BS - Who told you this? If this were the case then we have a whole bunch of untrained soldiers over there. BRING THEM HOME!!!

I gave my son to serve, period. Which is a lot more than the CHICKENHAWK's children are doing. Probably following in the footsteps of their CW fathers or drunks like the shrubs two heifers.

Well, Congress, having crawled out on a limb with Bush and the neocons, has to brandish the saw carefully as it saws the limb off. One must bring as many over to the tree as possible so that when the limb falls, only the damned are doomed.

A Democrat cannot be a defeatist when we've already lost. Republicans have seen us defeated and are so enamored of losing they want to keep on losing. When the world's only superpower cannot subdue a ragtag, disorganized, undisciplined and fractious opponent in four years of fighting, that is what's known as "losing." Democrats are only trying to salvage American amour propre from the wreckage in Baghdad before Bush reduces us to Bosniacs with better haircuts.

Thanks for those names. Would you mind checking to see if Hillary Clinton voted? My memory is not perfect but my gut feels like she was in the heartland, thanks. Either way, very good to know. :~)

According to C-Span, Hillary seems to have voted yes. But actually it doesn't give a breakdown of all Democratic votes yet, only says all Democrats except Johnson voted yes. But 51 Dems + 7 Republicans - Johnson = 1 vote not accounted for to get to 56.

Thank you very much. *grin*

At least 34 so-called Republicans have shown their true colors. They are necons or determined to vote for the neocon agenda for personal reasons even though the public has shown its contempt for the neoconservative persuasion and its policies.

The neocons cannot achieve their unholy objective of a world-wide militant imperial US if they permit this unlawful, illegal war to end. Bush is but a puppet on a string totally controlled by his neocon advisors and the desire to be a modern day Caesar.

We are engaged in a de facto civil war and the combatants are those who want America to be a democracy and governed by the rule of law as opposed to those that want America to be a militaristic empire ruled by a self-appointed elite who deem themselves to be the law.

What are you writing, a movie trailer? This is just entertaining to read while, simultaneously, not taking you seriously. The rhetoric is overwhelming.

To be clear, MOST of the U.S. Senate voted to rebuke the President today. The beauty of doing this over and over until 60 votes are reached is that each time a vote is taken, the MAJORITY of the Senate will have again rebuked the president for his failed war policy. If it takes 100 votes, that will be fine. We will have our troops home.

How many Chickenhawk Republicans voted no?

awolbush.com

Chickenhawk (politics)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Chickenhawk.

Chickenhawk (also chicken hawk and chicken-hawk) is a political epithet used in the United States to criticize a politician, bureaucrat, or commentator who strongly supports a war or other military action, but has never personally been in a war, especially if that person is perceived to have actively avoided military service when of draft age.

American Heritage Dictionary

chicken hawk n.

often chick·en·hawk (chĭk'ən-hôk') Informal A person who favors military force or action to carry out a foreign policy but has never served in the military.

I rest my case

Go soak your pate because it is addled.

Spoken like a true right winger. That is why we are in the mess we are in now because you all are sooooooooo right and know what's best.

They are necons or determined to vote for the neocon agenda for personal reasons even though the public has shown its contempt for the neoconservative persuasion and its policies.

The public has shown its contempt?? Are you serious? Where? I sure don't see it. I see a few liberal social progressive leftwing quacks pissing & moaning all the time in the media, so I guess if that somehow represents the majority % of America (it doesn't, SO far from it), then you could have a point.

But it doesn't, so you don't. Happy quacking!

Chickenhawk- Definition--One who provides propaganda to undermine an army at war.

So all the chickenhawks are democrats.

This is so typical of right-wingers. Always distorting and changing the facts.

Mission Accomplished

reactionary: Right wing Dictionary.

Chickenhawk- Definition--One who provides propaganda to undermine an army at war.

Mush [sic] more accurate for Democrats.

Gets a point breathtakingly wrong and won't accept correction? Check.

Accuses others of a logical fallacy or shabby debating tactics even as he uses them himself? Check.

Koozebane, is that you?

That was supposed to be, above all, they protect their own...Delay, Deny, Destroy or Buy, never accountable, Bonesmen.

Get out and travel a bit; there are far wittier, more articulate and factually based comments worth agreeing with. That was simply blowing off steam after the daily dose of insanity and spin that passes for news and work from the Beltway looters.

heck tell them you like the surge i don't care, get into the game.
No matter what you think wasting all this time on non binding anything is a joke when we pay these fools 200k a year to work less than a school year. It is too freaken early for them to be playing "voter gotcha" games.

believe me this is nothing more than sound bites for 08 and we dont pay these fools to just run all the time.

You will hear "SO&SO(r) voted against telling bush to stop killing outr children" and "SO&SO(d) voted against giving our troops money and now they will have to join al quada just to get a plane ticket home"

write your congressman and tell him to get back to work.

or call...Capitol Switchboard 202-224-3121....they can identify your MOC by zip code if you're unsure.

thanks, refreshers are always appreciated :~)

21 Republicans are up for re-election. 7 so far have changed sides. The West will be key. If Utahns start putting pressure on Bennett he may flip. Murkowski of Alaska could also flip. There are others.

Republican criminals in the Senate still have America by the neck

*rolls eyes*

The war hawks dont seem to understand why there are so few of their number left..
luckily we can fire them in 08

Senators who voted to block debate on the Iraq war yesterday and are up for re-election in 2008 (600 days):
Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.
Ted Stevens, R-Alaska
Jon Kyl, R-Ariz.
Wayne Allard, R-Colo*
Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga.
Larry Craig, R-Idaho
Richard Lugar, R-Ind.
Pat Roberts, R-Kans.
Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.
Thad Cochran, R-Miss.
John Sununu, R-N.H.
Elizabeth Dole, R-N.C.
James Inhofe, R-Okla.
Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.
Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn.
John Cornyn, R-Tex.
Michael Enzi, R-Wyo.

* Mr. Allard has already indicated he will not be seeking re-election, leaving an open seat.

EEEEEMAN, the strategy as I understand it is to let the Republicans hang themselves so thoroughly there will be no "buts" available to them in 2008. It's death by political constriction. First they were given a chance to say "Mr. President, we love you but this surge idea, give it another think, won't you?" They didn't do that. Next, the "we love you" will be dropped. With each vote, more Republicans will peel off to support the Democrats, because their constituents will be ringing the phones off the wall telling them to — or else. So as the sanctions tighten (including cutting funding so that troops must be withdrawn if persuasion doesn't work) the cover for Republicans worried about flip-flop damage will shrink. Of course if they fail to flip, the ads will run with the drool running down their lips as they urge that more and more troops be sent to die.

the vote on funding is happening because it has been discussed that reducing the funding could stop bush. Besides of impeachment, reducing funding is the only thing that can stop bush. The GOP knows that the dems dont have enough votes to impeach and they want to give away their only power to stop this inane man in the white house.

as for the whine about the dems not allowing them to put forward their plan falls on deaf ears with me, after six years of turning off the power and mics on the dems, of hiding meeting so they could find them and such, i can understand when the dems slap them back in the face with the same thing. They doo need to stop this nonscence but the complaints should come fromt he people and not the losers that used to do the same thing.

Won't have to talk. They will just send Bush a budget that will pull him to heel or else he will veto and the troops will get nothing. Then it'll be Bush, not Congress, that cut off funding to the troops. But meanwhile, this is diversionary to make the Republicans look like fools. I got a kick out of Ted Stevens crying that he missed his plane. He actually whined.

By the way, they already passed all the laws they promised they would, so they have nothing better to do till May.

By the way, they already passed all the laws they promised they would, so they have nothing better to do till May.

Sorry, but governing is a 24/7 thing. If they're wasting time and my money, what makes them any better than the Republicans? They may as well just go home and not take a paycheck since they aren't actually doing anything.

Not that being a Senator or Representative is that hard to begin with.

My point is the real work is all done, they can relax and torment the Republicans until May. Oh sure, they may have some vetoes to override, but essentially the main job for the next few months is pointing out how the president keeps sending troops to die and has no plan to resolve the problem and also how those Republicans keep helping him to be a troop-killing, al-Qaeda-enabling, no-plan-having, resource-wasting, soon-to-be-prosecuted sum@!$%#.

but essentially the main job for the next few months is pointing out how the president keeps sending troops to die and has no plan to resolve the problem

Here's one for ya: How about they come up with a plan... TO RESOLVE THE PROBLEM!?!?!?!

Enough of this high school popularity contest sit and look busy in class BS. Get to work.

Sheesh.

My point is the real work is all done, they can relax and torment the Republicans until May.

The work is never done. And seeing as how Congress doesn't do much work to begin with, they can't possibly be all done. When every kid in this country has health care, every person in this country has a full belly and a place to sleep, and every soldier is well armed and adequately trained and protected for the job, then I may agree that Congress is done... with the basics.

Until then, they're just wasting our time with these "non-binding resolutions". When they actually walk the walk, get back to me.

The resolution to the problem was evident in 2002: Do not go into Iraq! Since the patients won't listen, it will take about six to 18 months of nipple twisting till they have had enough. Basically annoying torture to wear down the will to resist the obvious path. Should curative effects fail to material promptly, administer election in November 2008 until ignominious defeat ensues. Repeat if necessary or election fraud ensues. Nipples sore enough yet, Matt? How bout you, Kai?

Sorry, but what the Democrats are doing isn't nipple twisting. In fact, it really isn't anything. The President's approval rating is abysmal, and yet they're still too afraid to act.

First, Congress did not simply "vote to go to war in Iraq" -- that is, the resolution is not a carte blanche directive.

Read the full text of the Resolution -- it specifically directed the President to

obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq

Bush, as we all know, skipped this step.

And, I might note, Congress included in the war resolution "justifying" information that we now know is patently false, info given to it by the Executive Branch, to whit:

Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations...

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq ...

Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend itself;

Finally, this last part of the resolution is also based on false intel:

defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq

Because THERE WAS NO THREAT.

Finally, this last part of the resolution is also based on false intel:

defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq

Because THERE WAS NO THREAT.

Kudos Kathy for hitting the real bottom line here, approval was conditional, based on a lie.

Job is done. We @!$%#ed their country up and provoked a civil war. Nothing more to do. Commited to the betterment of their fellow man?! As if! The people of Darfur are screaming for American help. Has Bush lifted a finger? Hell no, because they are black and they don't have any oil. Kinda like the folks in New Orleans.

Hell no, because they are black and they don't have any oil. Kinda like the folks in New Orleans.

Liberal talking point copied from (insert celebrity name to sound trendy here)... check. Liberal talking point... check.

When you can't knock down the argument because it happens to be true, attack the person making it.

Ah yes, now we see. You have no argument. So you attack me. Weak. Definitely weak.

"argument"? There was no argument in there. Just a bunch of hype and typical generic liberal talking points. No real question or even answer in there. You say its "true", but how? Where are the facts? Oh that's right, you don't have any.

Nevermind.

Civil war? Buddy the shiias and sunnis have been at each others necks for YEARS before we even got there (hundreds even).

Oil? Where is America profiting from Iraq's oil? Its in the hands of the Iraqi people... last time I checked I don't recall ME getting any royalty checks from Iraqi Oil Co, Inc.

Black? So based on your "point", if someone is black they're automatically some automatic target of America to not get any help, yada yada, right? So ignorant and tired its simply lame.

I see you are back Kai. Still waiting to hear about your military service.

So, if the Shias and the Sunnis have been at each each others necks for YEARS, why in the heck did we go in there messing with them. The freaking Iraqi oil was SUPPOSED to be paying for the reconstruction. Obviously, $350 billion and counting Iraqi oil is not paying for a darn thing.

The Decider in Chief looking out of the window of Airforce One at the Hurricane Katrina victims speaks volumes...Oh, but these were Black Americans and they did not get a darn thing from the shrub...THAT IS LAME

I see you are back Kai. Still waiting to hear about your military service.

Keep reading down below... ya know, the whole top to bottom, left to right kinda thing.

Fact: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." — George W. Bush, State of the Union Address, Jan. 28, 2003, making a claim that administration officials knew at the time to be false

Fact: No American troops are opposing the Janjaweed in Darfur, nor have any ever been sent.

Fact: The Bush administration was slow to provide federal aid to New Orleans. Indeed, some New Orleanians are still waiting for aid, 18 months after Hurricane Katrina.

Fact: All credible observers agree a civil war is under way in Iraq.

Fact: The United States invaded Iraq and prevented Baathist functionaries from maintaining government services, essentially contributing to a breakdown of law and order.

Fact: For many parts of Iraq, lawlessness prevails, nearly 3 years after "Major combat operations have ended."

Fact: Darfur's population is largely dark-skinned, animist or Christian. The janjaweed is largely lighter-skinned, Arabic, Muslim.

Fact: Tens of thousands of civilians have been murdered, thousands of women and girls raped and hundreds of villages have been destroyed.

Fact: The original objective of the invasion of Iraq was not to provide for the betterment of Iraqis but to remove Saddam Hussein from power.

Fact: You matter little. Therefore, you get no oil profits. You should have contributed heavily to the Republican Party in 2000. And 2001. And so on....

Fact: The Iraqi people matter even less. They get no oil profits either. They get shot if they are unlucky, blown up or tortured, then shot, if they are particularly unlucky.

One thing is for sure, the soldiers understand our Democratic process and expect folks to speak up and speak out.

Wow that's amazing, your son must've been a busy guy talking to every troop in the armed forces in order to know what they all think. Incredible, actually.

No smart a*s.

kai let's hear about your service in the armed forces...

There ought to be a credibility index here. You make a stupid remark, your credibility goes down a few points. Kai would be zooming for negative digits, if not there already. Tsk.

I hope you right wingers checked out Meet The Press. Even Hagel makes some good points. Even he said he would have welcomed debate on Vietnam. Seems the chickenhawks are afraid of the debate and characterize it as some unpatriotic act.

he'll never come back and reply, but he has a small point.. even if he was an ass.. fox says all the ttroups suppoort the republicans and our upset that the dems would abandon them and they even have 3 soldiers come on and say just that,
I am not sure if kai thinks either the soldiers dont understand democracy, or that kai thinks the soldiers would like you to give up your freedoms that they supposedly are supposed to be saved to fight for.

I will say out of nature, most troops will always publically support the commander and chief. It is the first rule of military, respect the chain of command.. so while privately they wont support the man or even call him an idiot, publically they are all pro bush..

That is true. Soldiers are not allowed to speak out against the Liar in Chief. I cannot believe they do not believe him and his cohorts are all a bunch of idiots who care more about their legacy than soldier's lives.

kai let's hear about your service in the armed forces...

Well for starters my entire family is made up of Marines, Force Recon, FBI, Special Forces, and Dignitary Protection agents. Me personally, i've trained within a few of these branches but due to disability can't currently serve. But suffice it to say I have experienced a whole lot more than you can imagine.

Thanks for asking though. Tell your son thank you for his sacrifice and service.

There ought to be a credibility index here. You make a stupid remark, your credibility goes down a few points. Kai would be zooming for negative digits, if not there already. Tsk.

I'm assuming someone like yourself would be the beacon of light to determine what constitutes a "stupid remark", and one that's kosher, correct? I'm guessing if it doesn't align perfectly with YOUR point of view or opinion, it's "stupid", right again?

Typical.

Show your face.

What are you talking about? You want to put it on your refrigerator or something?
That's just creepy lady.

Hell no...i can just imagine how creepy YOU are. Always trying to put people down. That is the tactic. It does not work here. You can see what I look like--nothing to hide here.

Always trying to put people down. That is the tactic. It does not work here.

I'm not trying to just put people down, I'm just sick off all the complaining and negativity I keep hearding from you liberals... Just such a downer, really.

Sorry Kai but I am not a liberal. I just do not support this war and what this shrub and his coward counterparts have done to our country.

Well to be perfectly honest with you, I totally agree there have been some major blunders and mistakes in this war. I also will agree that GW has made some horrible decisions and is ignoring other very serious issues our country faces right now (border security, illegals, etc).

Who would've thought we could agree? ;)

To try to keep fanatics like the current Decider in Chief and his Dick (Cheney that is) out of office. We are going to have to learn to cheat like the Repugs/Rethugs in order to win.

I SPY: American "Jelly Fish" politics. I dont know why you people bother to vote.

For exactly the same reason that pedestrians at traffic lights push those buttons to get crossing signals, even though we're sure they don't do anything. It's quick, it's fairly easy, and ultimately we hope it does something.

LOL :)

It's quick, it's fairly easy, and ultimately we hope it does something.

We are going to have to learn to cheat like the Repugs/Rethugs in order to win.

Learn to? How about having illegal aliens vote for you, that's a good tactic you've tried in the past. Already knew that one, eh?

I happen to disagree with the Shrub on the illegal aliens. No amnesty, go back home, period. Close the borders.

Not everyone who disagrees with the Repug war is a liberal or leftist.

Still waiting for your service record Kai...

I happen to disagree with the Shrub on the illegal aliens. No amnesty, go back home, period. Close the borders.

Cool, glad to see we can come to an agreement on something! :)

Good Kai now at least you understand that not everyone who is against the war is a liberal or leftist.

But, you have to agree that non-liberals who are against the war as much as yourself are few & far between, right? So you'll have to forgive my jumping to conclusions.

I do not think so. I have conservative values as well as what some would call liberal values or views. The only difference for me is that I cannot vote for a party that does not have a clue or care about what is important to me. The past few years under the Decider only enforces that thought and feelings more. His mother did not help any either with her Marie Antoinette comments.

Don't think I am any easier on the Dems either. There are things they do and say that drive me crazy too like illegal immigration and the dual language society we find ourselves perpetuating these days.

I cannot stand Ralph Nader the egotist so there are no good alternatives.

I like the "publicans" crack. Publicans are tax collectors, responsible for increasing imperial Rome's treasury, making sure the elite kept their perks and keeping down the plebians. We should call it the Publican Party.

Or if you want to go British, publicans are tavern keepers, whose goal in life isr taking the common man's money and keeping him drunk and stupid.

Since the New Deal, publicans have been on the wrong side of every issue of concern to ordinary Americans; Social Security, the war in Iraq, equal rights, civil liberties, church- state separation, consumer issues, public education, reproductive freedom, national health care, labor issues, gun policy, campaign-finance reform, the environment and tax fairness.

Perhaps "wrong" to YOU, but not to the majority of America. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Chickenhawks like you are not the majority of Americans. Don't flatter yourself.

Mick- liberals make up but a small proportion of the population. Last I read it was only like 15% or so. Traditionalist, Christian, conservatives like myself ARE the majority of Americans.

Don't flatter yourself.

I said nothing about Christians, traditionalists or conservatives, most of whom oppose the war in Iraq now, according to polls by the Pew Center, Gallup and the Washington Post. I specifically mentioned chickenhawks, that shrinking minority that favors continuing troop deployments in Iraq but do not volunteer themselves. Teeny tiny itty bitty little group, dwarved even by midget lesbians with full goatees.

And that's what I don't get: If going to Iraq and getting killed is such a good idea in your opinion, why aren't you there? Maybe we could get a swap arrangement going. One regular troop gets to go home for every beserker who puts his ass where his rhetoric is. Heck, everyone would be happy.

Again with the name-calling. Shouldn't you be packing for Iraq instead of insulting our intelligence?

Teeny tiny itty bitty little group, dwarved even by midget lesbians with full goatees.

Now we're onto something! :)

If going to Iraq and getting killed is such a good idea in your opinion, why aren't you there?

Where have I mentioned I'm all for shipping more troops to Iraq in this thread? Don't assume too much. My little brother has recently done 2 tours over there on the frontlines in the Marines and barely escaped death after a mortar attack and sniper fire. I know war is hell and would avoid it if we could.

Iraq has been plagued by a barrage of mistakes and oversights, I'll be the first to admit it. To be honest if we left right now I could care less about the Iraqi people, sad to say. Civil War? Been going on for ages, let em fight it out. Its what would happen once Iran moves in and emboldens the region against us that i'm worried about. Even if this was all stirred up by us in the beginning, we're in the middle of it now and will have to deal with whatever comes out the poop end.

Sorry, but I have a problem with people who think it was okay to march off and invade a country without thinking the consequences through. Did we learn anything from Viet Nam? That is the point I am making. I cannot speak for anyone else. They are chickenhawks as described by the definition, period.

I am by no means challenging anyone for not being warlike enough. On the contrary, I am saying that if you were in the armed services and not ducking and dodging it like many of the folks who sent our soldiers into that hell hole were, then you should have a better understanding of what war is all about.

No, the debate is not only for those who have served, but DO NOT impugn the integrity and the service of the veterans who bravely served this country during wartime and/or peacetime. Veterans as well as the American people have been labeled as unpatriotic by this administration and its warmongers because we do not support the war. It is so offensive and maddening to see and hear these things. The Swift Boaters, congressmen, reporters, and others who malign those who would speak up against this war are the major threat to our country and its democracy.

So, it is not "silly" to me and I am sure many others feel the same way.

Oh by the way, when my son came back from Korea he was assigned to a TACOMM (?) unit in New Orleans "living on the economy" as they say because there was no base there. He and his family lost everything when Hurricane Katrina destroyed New Orleans in August 2005. I had just taken my grandchildren back home to Kenner the week before. I know firsthand how this administration has treated the people affected by this terrible disaster. I cannot be happy that a school in Iraq is opening up when I know people in this country are suffering daily because of circumstances beyond their control.

$350 billion and counting...that money would have gone a long way on the Gulf Coast and for poorer Americans whom this administration seems to have no concern about. Instead we have mortgaged their future by borrowing to pay for this war that had nothing to do with 9/11.

Funny!!

Don't forget our allies the cut and run Brits...

This just in: The Coalition of the Willing has been renamed the Army of One. Will the last soldier in Iraq please turn off the light?

You cannot hate stupidity

AO-K - standard protocol is to use the "quote" button (blockquote tags) to offset quoted material.

ALL CAPS LOOKS LIKE SHOUTING.

And it's hard to read, to boot - especially when more than a few words. That's because we read by "word shape" that is created (in part) with ascenders and descenders (eg, y and h). Words in all caps have the same shape and are thus a heavier cognitive load.