February 18, 2007

Republicans: We don't need no stinking debate

So much for debating a war which has drug on longer than WWII with no end in sight.
From Politico.com:
In a rare Saturday session, Senate Republicans blocked Democrats from debating a House-approved resolution rejecting President Bush's plan to send another 21,500 combat troops into Iraq.

Republicans united largely behind Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Cabbage Patch Doll, and refused to allow the measure to be considered unless they could offer an alternative declaring that funding for military personnel in Iraq would not be cut.

The vote on a cloture motion filed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., was 56 to 34, four short of the 60 votes needed to begin debate.

Seven Republicans voted with the Democrats: Sens. John Warner of Virginia, Norm Coleman of Minnesota, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Gordon Smith of Oregon and Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, both of Maine.

Only Coleman and Collins had previously sided with the Democrats in an earlier bid to start Senate debate an Iraq resolution that would certainly have led to a rebuke of the president’s strategy.

Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, I-Conn., joined the GOP filibuster Saturday and voted against cloture.
A big thanks goes out to Smokin' Joe, the guy all the DLC types just love. Who would have suspected he'd bolt his party on such an important matter? (cough)

It's worth noting that John McCain skipped out on the vote altogther, choosing to stump in Iowa instead of putting down his marker on the issue.

The debate over whether to debate the escalation was just depressing in its vapidity and ugliness. Perhaps most disgusting were politicians of both parties, though overwhelmingly Republican, using "the troops" like some ragdoll prop and trying to push them into the middle of the debate in a way which they have no business being used.

This red herring about how a debate over the wisdom of escalation is somehow going to put all of our troops into some deep funk and depression is pure unadultrated hogwash, as is the notion spouted by some that if we don't pursue this phoney baloney and largely meaningless escalation, then we'll all be praying in a mosque before we know what hit us.

Pure stupidity, and it's truly jaw-dropping to actually listen to what some of these cretinous, mostly southern, Republican house members are willing to say on the floor of the house. If the intelligence of their remarks is any reflection on their constituency, then there actually are places in this country populated by the likes of the banjo playing guy in Deliverance where people swim in their own gene pool.

The worst moron this time around is the guy who's skeered to death a them mooslums. The same idiot who freaked out when the rep from Minnesota took his oath on a Koran in a private ceremony. I don't have the text of his remarks handy, and I've conveniently blocked out his name from my memory. (to save space) But I do recall his drawling on about how the Mooslums will be hoisting the star and crescent over all of our schools and capitol buildings if we debate Bush's phony escalation.

I think that's what you resort to when you're just plain out of any rational argument whatsoever. Try the good old "Muslim hoarde" tactic. (just like the "Yellow Peril" and "Red Menace" before it.) I also liked the way he pronouced their religious leader as "Moo-ham-ed". Nevermind the troop morale being affected by remarks in the House, hearing these morons depresses the morale of 90% of the planet! Makes you wince to think that anyone outside the U.S. might actually hear this sort of stuff. I hate to see these folks confirming their very worse opinions of us.

So now the games continue. Republicans apparently trying to force the Dems into putting their money where their mouths are by daring them to cut funding for the escalation.

I sincerely hope that the Murtha legislation succeeds. It requires that no troops be dispatched unless they are both fully trained, and fully equipped with necessary body armor, etc.

And perhaps most importantly, it would provide that troops have a full year between being deployed, as has always been the case prior to the Iraq invasion. This alone would serve to slow down any increase in troop levels.


I've just noticed that Dave Barrett over at Moline Democratic Maverick has a post up mentioning this cro-magnon I refer to above. He's a Virginia Representive by the name of Virgil Goode and he makes Goober from Mayberry look like Steven Hawking.


At 2/18/2007 2:41 PM, Anonymous Godfearing said...

Congressional Democrats are all bark and no bite. If Peloise and her Yellow Firends want to cut off funds to our boys in harms way, why don't they do it? The reason they won't is because they know it is the wrong thing to do.

All these hand-wringgers can wring their mits, but that is all they are willing to do. At least Bush is man enough to do what he says (FIGHT).

If the Dope and Pelosis and Hare want to cut off funds to our troops --- WHY DON'T ThEY DO iT?

Because if they did do "it" the American people would throw these foools in control out on their ears.

Sure a few peacenicks would be happy, but in the end, nobody is taking peacenicks seriously!

Support the troops, support America, God Bless our President!

At 2/18/2007 8:15 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

You should be afraid of God. He must hate shallow fools.

First of all, the entire argument that if you cut funding, you're somehow leaving the troops already in the field defenseless or unequipped is just so much bullshit.

It's simply not the case, as much as the right wing tries to pretent and gullible rubes like you swallow that notion.

There's plenty of billions more that haven't already been looted by corporations closely linked to the administration to provide for the troops in the field.

Any defunding would simply be a means to prevent Bush from sending more men and women to their deaths in this useless meat grinder.

For someone who spouts all this jingoistic clap-trap about supporting the troops and has to drag God kicking and screaming into the matter, you sure seem to be all too willing to send good American men and women, husbands and fathers, to somewhere where they stand a very good chance of getting maimed, blinded, or killed.

And the most important fact, and one which you willfully choose to ignore, is that it's for nothing.

Any surge of the size Bush is proposing is simply killing some U.S. troops to prop him up politically. It's far too few to actually accomplish anything concrete or meaningful. All that will be accomplished is they'll go into some areas which they've already "cleaned up" and lost again over and over and "clean" them up again, declare victory, and then leave.

Why bother? Just so Bush can claim victory of some kind and your precious John Wayne/Rambo fantasies of American might won't get bruised?

Sorry. I don't want anyone's kid or father or mother to come home in a bag for that reason.

And if you're even paying half attention, you realize that that that's the only reason.

Hiding behind these troops as you do is truly shameless and the actions of a scoundrel, not a patriot.

At 2/19/2007 8:57 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the Democrats are against the effort in Iraq, and if they were voted in based on their opposition to the war in Iraq - then grow a backbone and kill the funding for the war in Iraq and bring the troops back.

Anything shy of this is nothing but a bunch of political posturing by a party that says one thing and does another.

The DEMOCRATS have control. NOW is the time to actually DO something. If the Democrats are against the war, then they need to accept the responsibility for doing something about it - it is THEY who control the pursestrings.

Resolution - what a bunch of crap...and all of you democrat goofballs think that they are just wonderful for all of their 'talk' but no 'action.'

Let's undermine our troops in the field by our dialogue - yet leave them there...

At 2/19/2007 11:56 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

How nice of the Republicans to indignantly demand that the Democrats do something which they neither want to do nor intend to do but which may cause them political damage. You guys are all heart.

And of course, you rage and demand they do this, and then if they do, you'll scream bloody murder that they actually did. What kind of low hypocrisy is that?

Well, it's the kind the right always practices. It's the kind they base their entire political strategy and existence on and always have.

People see right through it.

You may see the world in black and white, but responsible people don't. There's more than either full support for sending more troops into a folly of a "war" and simply bringing them all home all at once.

But of course, you're busy trying to suggest those are the only two options. Shouldn't you be embarassed at being so disingenuous and dumb about such an important issue?

Is it only politics to you? Just a game?

Why not be serious and find a way to oppose what is widely regarded as a failed strategy and help find a way to decrease our presense in Iraq and find a different approach other than feeding an endless stream of our military into a no-win situation?

And keep in mind that almost none of the plans put forth by Democrats call for immediate and complete withdrawal from Iraq, even though you pretend (or wish) they did.

At 2/19/2007 6:14 PM, Anonymous RI Republican said...

Come on Dope, what kind of crap is that?

The Dem's blather on about Iraq. 'We are there because of lies', 'we should not be there', 'we need to be out by a certain date', 'we are against a troop buildup', etc, etc.

Now you are trying to sell that the Democrats are for the war, for fighting?

The simple fact is that the Democrats, like Clinton showed in his terms, have no conviction.

If they are against the war (and they are) - THEN DO SOMETHING TANGIBLE ABOUT IT!

But, PLEASE do not sit there and say, 'we cannot because then someone will criticize us.'

What an incredible joke. Goodness, can't the Democrats ever STAND FOR SOMETHGING and then ACT UPON IT?????

At 2/19/2007 6:34 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

The Dems have rubber stamped this war for FOUR YEARS now, and you say they never want to fight?

What do the Republicans stand for? What action are they demanding? Just to keep sending an endless stream of billions of tax dollars, lives, and equipment into an endless war without a plan or an end?

That, my friend, is insane.

I ask you. Just how will we know when we've "won" the war in Iraq?


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home