9-Month Iraq Timetable Is Voted Down by Senate

[rodeodance]

Source: wpost

9-Month Iraq Timetable Is Voted Down by Senate
Democrats to Offer Altered Proposal for Consideration Next Week

By Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, September 22, 2007; Page A03

The Senate yesterday rejected a nine-month timetable for bringing most troops home from Iraq, yet another legislative defeat for Democrats in what is shaping up as a losing battle to force President Bush to end the war.

The proposal, offered by Senate Armed Services Chairman Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.) and Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), fell on a 47 to 47 vote, with 60 votes needed for passage. Three Democrats refused to back the plan, and three Republicans supported it, but the result showed little movement from a similar vote in July.

Levin said he and Reed would explore ways to alter their proposal to attract more support in time to schedule another vote next week, before the Senate completes debate on an annual defense policy bill and moves on to other matters.

"We didn't make it today, but we're going to keep trying," Levin said. "The stakes are just simply too high to stop what we're doing, which is putting pressure on President Bush to change course and on Prime Minister Maliki to change course."

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/21/AR2007092100134.html

[Tom Joad]

1. all they have to do is get 41 senators to block the spending measure.

[robinlynne]

2. Who are the two dem rats?

[Inuca]

3. Ds voting no

Nelson (NE), Pryor, Dodd (protest vote)

[robinlynne]

4. Why am I not surprised? the nelson/pryor duo again. so Feinstein finally had one good day?

[Inuca]

5. Feinstein has been OK on Iraq

if I remember correctly.

[robinlynne]

6. I don't think you remember correctly... She has been supporting the war.

[Inuca]

7. I was referring to votes this year

earlier... I do not remember.

[robinlynne]

10. I don't remember well enough either...

[acmavm]

14. Feinstein not only has been very rah-rah on the war, check out and see

how here hubby (clear up to 2005 or 2006) made big bucks off the slaughterhouse we call Iraq.

[nodehopper]

8. what is a protest vote?

[Inuca]

9. He said he will not vote

for something that does not include cutting off the funds. He voted yes yesterday on Feingold/Reid that did that, but no today.

[Seabiscuit]

11. When will it dawn on them that they don't need *any* votes?

Just don't give Bush any more spending bills for Iraq. Don't even introduce one onto the floor of either house of Congress. Hold them up in committee. Send Reid and Pelosi to the White House to let him know that spending for the war is over. Period. Kaput.

The only alternative is to continue introducing spending bills containing deadlines which either fail to pass or get vetoed. Over and over again.

I personally think the only bill that should ever be offered to a vote is one mandating an immediate end to the war and rescinding the IWR and prohibiting Bush from using any Pentagon funds whatsoever to continue this bloody war. If it fails, just keep putting the same bill out on the floor with a different number on it.

[DLnyc]

12. It takes 51 votes to pass . . . NOT 60

It takes 60 votes to end debate. If repubs won't end debate, LET THEM FILLIBUSTER.

My brain is hurting from this constant twisting of logic. It does NOT take 60 votes to pass anything, just 51. And, as others have posted, Dems, having a majority, can refuse to even bring a funding bill to the floor anyway.

How can anyone respect a party that was afraid to fillibuster when they were in the minority, and is now afraid to MAKE the other party fillibuster when THEY are in the minority?

Wouldn't it be easier for the Dems to just say "We have no balls/uteri--we are just decoration--please Mr. all-powerful Rethugnican industrial war complex just write up any damn policy you please here's a blanket approval, plus an extra vote censuring ourselves and anything we ever fought for."?

Rethugs should be on their 50th hour of fillibustering today, trying to explain why troops cannot have time out of Iraq at least equal to time served in. Can't cut off debate? Then KEEP TALKING!!!

Anyway, I've had it. When Dems had 45 votes, we didn't refuse to end debate because, apparently, we thought that would be crude and undignified. Now we have 51 and we don't even make rethugs fillibuster when they refuse to end debate. What's the point?

[unhappycamper]

13. That little point you mention is not talked about.

Just stop with the cloture votes & make them filibuster every frickking time they don't like something. Nothing worthwhile will get done until dick and dubya are impeached and our troops come home.

The dems (theoretically at least) control what comes on the floor. Iraq spending bill? Don't bring it up. That's the way to end the occupation.

[saigon68]

16. The DLC democrats don't want to offend the Chimp

Or "Gangster Cheney" for that matter either

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

15. They've been playing this semantic game for my entire life.

The other big game is that one branch passes legislation- to a loud cheer- while the other does not- to the sound of crickets.

:grr: