Obama Introduces "Iraq War De-Escalation Act" to BRING OUR TROOPS HOME!!!

[MethuenProgressive]

The Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007 that is.

(1) DEADLINE FOR COMMENCEMENT OF REDEPLOYMENT- Except as otherwise provided in this section, the phased redeployment of the Armed Forces of the United States from Iraq shall commence not later than May 1, 2007.

(2) SCOPE AND MANNER OF REDEPLOYMENT- The redeployment of the Armed Forces under this section shall be substantial, shall occur in a gradual manner, and shall be executed at a pace to achieve the goal of the complete redeployment of all United States combat brigades from Iraq by March 31, 2008,

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s110-433

Never scheduled for debate, sent to a committee, and never voted on - not even for a traditional Present from Obama Himself.

"Introduced: Jan 30, 2007. Last Action: Jan 30, 2007: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations."

Wow... look at how hard he worked to bring our troops home:
It was sent to a committee that he's a member of, where he then ignored it.

Barack Obama, "against this war from the beginning" (unless you look at his record.)

[sunonmars]

1. stunning isnt it, all set up to make him look good no doubt

smoke and mirrors.

[MethuenProgressive]

3. Nothing more than a "vanity" bill.

No doubt listed on his very short perfumed resume.

[ursi]

38. do you have loved ones in Iraq?

[jackson_dem]

28. Number of bills Obama introduced on Iraq prior to running for president: 0

[MethuenProgressive]

30. Shhh!

Facts make the kool-ade taste bitter!

[MethuenProgressive]

40. bumpy

[NJSecularist]

2. You have no idea how bills in Congress work, do you?

[MethuenProgressive]

5. Here's what we know about this bill:

We know this bill made it further than Barack's did.

[karynnj]

10. But many of HRC's are the same

The fact is that MANY bills on Iraq were introduced around that time - many by members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which Barak sits on. In early 2007, the committee worked on this issue and some bills came out of it. In addition, Feingold/Reid that contained a lot of the language from Kerry/Feingold passed the Senate and the house passed a similar bill. It did follow the Schoolhouse rock path - but got vetoed by Bush.

There are MANY accomplishments in HRC's list that are the same. Bills introduced and referred to committee. Some may have influenced a bill that came out of the committee - some likely didn't. If they did, they often will be provisions in a bill with the committee chair and ranking member listed as sponsors.

[MethuenProgressive]

12. Thank you for your thoughtful post.

Good luck to your candidate!

[NJSecularist]

14. Damn, facts are a brutal thing to a Hillbot

The harsh reality of how Congress works just smacked you right in the face. :)

That's the reality of the Congress... many bills are proposed and many never reach the floor. This isn't exclusive to Obama. Clinton has had her fair share.

:)

[MethuenProgressive]

16. Thanks for the kick on this thread about Obama's Vanity Bill!

You ObamaBots are funny!

[NJSecularist]

18. Methuen, I just want to say this...

Regardless of our differences regarding candidate preferences, you've been a very entertaining poster to read.

I may not agree with you, but you've been comic relief (in a good way).

And you don't troll like other Clinton supporters. :)

[MethuenProgressive]

19. NJ, I just want to say this in return:

Good luck to your candidate!

[NJSecularist]

21. Thank you!

Good look to yours too.

[karynnj]

26. Thank you

I think for both HRC and Obama need to somehow get people to understand how things are done. In 2004, one of the "fact" checkers used Thomas (the Congressional record system) to dispute Senator Kerry's claim on the number of bills that his name was on. This happened because they looked only at the ones the system listed him as "sponsor" for - which they had one field. So, if in a Republican controlled Senate Kerry and McCain sponsored a bill for veterans - the system showed McCain as the sponsor and Kerry would be listed first on the co-sponsor list. Therefore, the fact check did not give him credit.

In addition since 2004, I have found that it is fun to watch the committee meetings. Most bills are huge and in the mark ups, you see the provisions debated and/or voted on in committee. I find it interesting because you see more of who the Senators or Congressmen are. You see who bring up the best questions and how they adapt to new information in a few cases. The point is that very substantiative pieces of work are simply included within a bill. For instance, in the stimulus package there is a provision by Kerry and Smith to deal with some parts of the mortgage problem. If the Senate bill passes with it in and the house agrees to it and Bush passes it - that will be an important piece of work - but it will not have Kerry's or Smith's name on it. (Oddly, the Boston Herald, but not the Globe covered it. http://www.bostonherald.com/business/general/view.bg?articleid=1070479 )

Even people not on committee's will sometimes be able to get the managers of bills to add things. This can sometimes be seen watching the Senate floor when after a sponsor of an amendment the sponsor of the bill accepts it into the bill or the provision is allowed in via a voice vote. The first time, in 2005, I saw the first was an amendment to let surviving spouses to stay for a year in Military housing - after Kerry spoke of how this very inexpensive change could allow these people to figure out their future without having to make an abrpt move - Warner added it. In Fall 2006, Kerry's sense of the Senate resolution for Bush to have a regional summit was included after a voice vote in a defense appropriations bill. It was a part of Kerry/Feingold that Warner liked and was willing to include. It was important as the first call of this sort actually passed, but other than the Senate Record, the only place I saw it was as a press release on Kerry's web site.

In addition, a bill that is before it's time can be introduced to socialize the ideas. Many of the campaign finance bills were this way. Biden had one in the 1970s. Kerry and Wellstone had one in the the 1990s. They were far more serious reform than McCain/Feignold and the Kerry/Wellstone one was used as a model for the Arizona bill. Also, some bills are introduced and then morph into a different bill, often taking language from the former. S-CHIP began as an entitlement bill written by Kennedy and Kerry. Kennedy worked with Hatch to get the (non-entitlement) S-CHIP bill that gives the state's more ability to design their program.

I apologize for using Kerry examples - but they are the ones I know - also as he is not running - he can be a non-partisan example. The same things happen on their committees. In 2008, if HRC or Obama are questioned as not having done something because it's "not their bill", if we can show that they DID do what they said - we can push back.

[jackson_dem]

29. Why did "against the war from the beginning" vote against Kerry/Feingold?

[karynnj]

32. Likely because their was intense pressure from the party leadership

None of the people likely to run for President in 2008 voted for it other than Kerry and Feingold. Edwards was specifically against the deadline in it - so count him out too.

I think had Obama voted for that, he would have had an even stronger rebuttal to Bill Clinton's attack. That was not an easy vote to make many Senators were attacked for it. Kerry was completely vilified by the Clinton wing for doing it.

No one is perfect.

[OzarkDem]

4. Sorry, after the way he's handled the health care reform issue

I no longer believe ANYTHING Obama says.

[sunonmars]

6. me too, disaster in waiting

[MethuenProgressive]

7. "I introduced legislation TO BRING OUR TROOPS HOME!!"

("but it was just for fun, no one ever did anything about it, and when it was sent to the committee I sit on, we ignored it...")
:eyes:

[still_one]

13. and since in your other posts you indicated you will not vote for Obama if he is the nominee

perhaps you will get the same attitude from me if Hillary wins

[MethuenProgressive]

17. You're not talking to me, are you? I have never posted such a thing,

and have always said I'll vote for our nominee, no matter who it is.
Link or slink with your BS smear.

[still_one]

20. No I'm not, I was talking about OzarkDem. Most people realize that if we don't

stand together when this is over we will lose the general election

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4381494&mesg_id=4381494

Sorry for the confusion, Maybe I posted it in the wrong place

but it wasn't a BS smear directed at that poster, see the above link

[MethuenProgressive]

22. "if we don't stand together when this is over we will lose the general election"

That's the spirit!!
Good luck to your candidate still. Sorry about getting defensive but since I agree with your point of view on that wholeheartedly, I'm sure you understand.
:kick:

[still_one]

23. I am just as upset by the Obama supporters also. They are ragging on Hillary

for showing emotion at some event today

We can debate an argue the issues, but these personal attacks are going to hurt us

I truely believe that when the primaries our over and we need to go against the republicans in the general election, we will all stand together, including the original poster I was critisizing

There is a lot of emotion being generated, and I think that is good, because that passion can be directed toward winning the general election

Good luck to your candidate also.

Like John Edwards said, no matter what happens, the Democratic party will make history

[MethuenProgressive]

31. wish we could rec posts!

:thumbsup:

[MethuenProgressive]

36. kick!

[MethuenProgressive]

41. Cherry flavored kick

[Tarc]

8. Just like the nuclear regulatory bill

As soon as his palms were greased a bit with Exelon payola;

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/02/03/in_nuclear_bill_an_early_obama_test/

Obama made revision after revision to weaken it to the pint of irrelevance, yet still chalks it up as a victory. :eyes:

It is sad that there is a small but very vocal set of Animal Farm-like pigs around here who are corralling the sheep into voting for this sham of a do-nothing Senator. It is bad enough that we already have ineffective mollycoddlers like Pelosi and Reid running Congress. Do we really want to put a 3rd into the biggest office in the land?

[MethuenProgressive]

9. There's an interesting DU thread along those lines:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4364922&mesg_id=4364922

[MethuenProgressive]

11. Wow. Why aren't the Obamas rec-ing this wonderful PrObama thread?

Maybe they do read before rec-ing?? :rofl:

[goldcanyonaz]

15. More pandering to his Cult.

[MethuenProgressive]

24. If this thread was about Hillary showing emotion it'd be on the greatest page.

Especially if it used rabidly sexist hate speech.

[goldcanyonaz]

25. Just bumped it there with a rec.

:hi:

[MethuenProgressive]

27. Thank you goldcanyon!

:hi:

[AX10]

33. Obama has nothing to run on but "Hope and Change".

He had to offers these bills in order to get attention for himself. He never had any plans of putting any effort into pushing them through the system. He wants the appearance of "change" but not the action. He is a hypocrit.

[MethuenProgressive]

34. Yeah, "Vote for ME! (And Hope I'll Change!"

[MethuenProgressive]

35. Supah Tuesday Kick!

:kick:

[MethuenProgressive]

42. bump!

[ursi]

37. good, I have family members who want to come home!

[MethuenProgressive]

39. Then this bill won't help them at all.

It disappeared the day he filed it.