House Democrat calls for immediate troop withdrawal

muthafukers...

Does anyone have a membership to rollcall?

subscription required
----------------------

GOP Lawmakers Float Ethics Probe of Murtha
By John Bresnahan
Roll Call Staff
Friday, Nov. 18

Republican lawmakers say that ties between Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) and his brother’s lobbying firm, KSA Consulting, may warrant investigation by the House ethics committee.

http://www.rollcall.com/issues/1_1/breakingnews/11329-1.html

 

Actually I think they all are going to vote against it along with the repubs. Making it moot.

 

I think it would be better to be present, but not voting. We'll see what happens.



Keep D&D Civil.

 

"Embolden our enemies," is a very easy thing to say and is incredibly vague. On its own, it really says nothing at all. A good portion of the violence in Iraq doesn't even have anything to do with US troops because there aren't very many honest to goodness "enemies" of the US in Iraq... although there are more than Bush would have had you believe with his early prediction that troops would be welcomed with open arms. Take today for example. 77 people were killed and 80 were injured in a suicide bombing that targeted worshipping Shi'ites.

I also don't think Murtha proposed this bill as a serious policy, and I doubt he will get many votes from the Democratic party. A more likely explanation is that he wanted a national platform in a Republican owned Congress to breech the idea that we need a serious planning effort to finish a war that has no win-win solution. The administration to this point hasn't been able to let go of this idea, but they need to consider a way of getting out and bringing a political equilibrium to Iraq that prevents civil war (which may not be possible). Salvaging something from this situation should be everyones top priority, and this proposal was intended to shift the conversation towards that. I think that Murtha probably went a little overboard. To get anything in politics you have to ask for more than you will get, but this proposal is so extreme that it may have done as much harm to his desires as good.

The most critical group of people in the support of the war are not Democrats anyway, but moderate Republicans. As more moderates separate themselves from the administration due to next year's elections, you will hear more and more about withdrawal... which makes the adminstration's rebuttals a little bizarre. Shouldn't they be rebutting these things to the moderates they are losing, not the Crusaders?

 

I don't think there is going to be any significant public support for it, and therefore will never sustain itself. It is a pretty transparant tactic.

 

The vote's happening now. So far it's a down the line party vote.

[edit] OMG! I just realized that the vote they're taking is just a vote to debate the resolution. If that passes, they'll debate for an hour before they make the final vote! AAAAHHHHGGGHHHH!!!

What are the Rockets doing......?

 

Losing. It was ugly.


Keep D&D Civil.

 

Not to worry my friend. It was just calling a bluff.

 

I was talking about the Rockets, but thanks.
What the Republicans did was ugly, but the Democratic response was adequate. The GOP spin machine is "full speed ahead" on Fox. I don't think the American public is buying it any longer.


edit: Here's the story from the Washington Post:

House Rejects Iraq Pullout After GOP Forces a Vote
Democrats Enraged By Personal Attack

By Charles Babington
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, November 19, 2005; A01



Differences over policy on the Iraq war ignited an explosion of angry words and personal insults on the House floor yesterday when the chamber's newest member suggested that a decorated war veteran was a coward for calling for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops.

As Democrats physically restrained one colleague, who appeared as if he might lose control of himself as he rushed across the aisle to confront Republicans with a jabbing finger, they accused Republicans of playing political games with the war.

GOP leaders hastily scheduled a vote on a measure to require the Bush administration to bring the troops home now, an idea proposed Thursday by Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.). The Republican-proposed measure was rejected 403 to 3, a result that surprised no one.

The idea was to force Democrats to go on the record on a proposal that the administration says would be equivalent to surrender. Recognizing a political trap, most Democrats -- including Murtha -- said from the start they would vote no.

But the maneuvering exposed the chamber's raw partisan divisions and prompted a tumultuous scene, which Capitol Hill veterans called among the wildest and most emotional they had ever witnessed.

Though even many Democrats think Murtha's immediate withdrawal plan is impractical, it struck a chord in a party where frustration with the war and the Bush administration's open-ended commitment is mounting fast. Murtha galvanized the debate as few others could have. He is a 33-year House veteran and former Marine colonel who received medals for his wounds and valor in Vietnam, and he has traditionally been a leading Democratic hawk and advocate of military spending.

Murtha's resolution included language the Republicans wanted to avoid, such as "the American people have not been shown clear, measurable progress" toward stability in Iraq. It also said troops should be withdrawn "at the earliest practicable date," although Murtha said in statements and interviews Thursday that the drawdown should begin now.

Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) drafted a simpler resolution calling for an immediate withdrawal of troops, saying it was a fair interpretation of Murtha's intent. Members were heatedly debating a procedural rule concerning the Hunter resolution when Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-Ohio) was recognized at 5:20 p.m. Schmidt won a special election in August, defeating Iraq war veteran Paul Hackett, and is so new to Congress that some colleagues do not know her name.

She told colleagues that "a few minutes ago I received a call from Colonel Danny Bubp," an Ohio legislator and Marine Corps Reserve officer. "He asked me to send Congress a message: Stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message: that cowards cut and run, Marines never do."

Dozens of Democrats erupted at once, pointing angrily at Schmidt and shouting repeatedly, "Take her words down" -- the House term for retracting a statement. For a moment Schmidt tried to keep speaking, but the uproar continued and several GOP colleagues surrounded her as she sat down, looking slightly dazed. Presiding officer Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) gaveled in vain for order as Democrats continued shouting for Schmidt to take back her words. Rep. Martin T. Meehan (D-Mass.) yelled "You guys are pathetic!" from the far end of the Democratic section to the GOP side.

Just as matters seemed to calm a bit, Rep. Harold E. Ford Jr. (D-Tenn.) suddenly charged across the aisle to the GOP seats, jabbing his finger furiously at a small group of GOP members and shouting, "Say Murtha's name!" Rep. David R. Obey (D-Wis.), who had led the chants for striking Schmidt's comments, gently guided Ford by the arm back to the minority party's side.

At 5:31, when order was finally restored, Schmidt rose again and said softly, "My words were not directed at any member of the House." She asked that they "be withdrawn" from the record.

As the House temporarily moved to other matters, a calm Ford said in an interview that he confronted the Republicans because he was angry that they were using a ploy to avoid "a real debate" about the war. "I said, 'If you believe it's about Murtha, then talk about Murtha, don't hide behind a resolution,' " Ford said.

It was past 10 p.m. when Murtha addressed a relatively subdued House. Hunter's resolution "is not what I envisioned" because it avoids a broader debate of the war, which "is not going as advertised," Murtha said. "The American people are way ahead of us" in wanting a strategy to bring the troops home, he added. "It's easy to sit in your air-conditioned offices and send them into battle."

But Rep. Sam Johnson (R-Tex.), who spent seven years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, said U.S. forces in Iraq "need our full support." He added: "They need to have full faith that a few naysayers in Washington won't cut and run and leave them high and dry."

Those voting yes on the resolution were Democrats Jose E. Serrano (N.Y.), Robert Wexler (Fla.) and Cynthia McKinney (Ga.). Six other Democrats -- none of them from Maryland or Virginia -- voted "present."

Top Democrats attacked the GOP tactic. Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said the Republicans "engaged in an act of deception that undermines any shred of dignity that might be left in this Republican Congress." She called Hunter's resolution "a political stunt" and "a disservice to our country and to our men and women in uniform."

Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) said that the GOP resolution was meant to prevent a serious debate on the war's prosecution, and that he lacked the words "to express the magnitude of my contempt with which I view this shabby, petty political maneuver."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/18/AR2005111802896.html


The Republicans have sunk to this. And, finally, the Democrats are starting to show some backbone.



Keep D&D Civil.

 

The republicans should be ashamed of themselves. Especially since there is quietly a push to do just what Murtha's resolution called for on Rumsfeld's desk as we speak. Are republicans going to vote this down too?


Defense official: Rumsfeld given Iraq withdrawal plan
Plan calls for troops to begin pulling out after December elections

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The top U.S. commander in Iraq has submitted a plan to the Pentagon for withdrawing troops in Iraq, according to a senior defense official.

Gen. George Casey submitted the plan to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. It includes numerous options and recommends that brigades -- usually made up of about 2,000 soldiers each -- begin pulling out of Iraq early next year.

The proposal comes as tension grows in both Washington and Baghdad following a call by a senior House Democrat to bring U.S. troops home and the deaths of scores of people by suicide bombers in two Iraqi cities.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/11/18/iraq.plan/index.html

 

The repubs want to show the country the still have hand ~ they do barely...

 

I'm pretty sure Frist blew all credibility when he stated that the braindead gal in Florida was a-ok by his medical standards.

I watched enough C-SPAN yesterday to start wishing we had a "restart" button somewhere, these guys (both sides) are just embarassing.

 

I sort of felt the same way. After about three hours I turned to my wife (who was pissed because I dominated the TV for three hours of CSpan ) and said "this is the cream of the crop in America?"

 

What I don't get about it, is that if the GOP didn't like the proposal why not debate it on its merits instead of trying that stunt first? Why did we have to go through that?

 

IMHO as with the outing of Plame, it was a cynical and vicious attempt to silence anyone who questions the administration.

 

No human endeavor ever reaches fruition without a deadline.

I was for this war because I believe it is the duty of the free world to overthrow murderous dictators whenever possible (the liberal hawk view).
That has been accomplished. But winning guerilla wars requires the hearts and minds of the indigenous people and we aren't ever going to win the hearts of the Iraqi people, that's a job for the local government.

We can't just leave them untrained and defenseless after dismantling their military structure but we have to leave sometime, and the date needs to be soon and definite so the people there know they have to get their act together.

Declare victory and go home (it worked out OK in Viet Nam)

 

Murtha's going to be the guest on Meet the Press Sunday.

 

the final vote was 403-3. what would constitute a landslide in your opinion?

 

No, it's a handjob...

 

Who were the three that didn't go with the majority on this one?