WaPo gets it right: Senate rETHUGS responsible for blocking longer leaves for soldiers

[babylonsister]

Longer Leaves for Troops Blocked
Senate Bill Short of 60 Votes Needed

By Shailagh Murray and Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, September 20, 2007; Page A01

Senate Republicans yesterday rejected a bipartisan proposal to lengthen the home leaves of U.S. troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, derailing a measure that war opponents viewed as one of the best chances to force President Bush to accelerate a redeployment of forces.

The proposal, sponsored by Sens. James Webb (D-Va.) and Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.), failed on a 56 to 44 vote, with 60 votes needed for passage -- a tally that was virtually identical to a previous vote in July. A last-minute campaign by the Defense Department and the White House to kill the measure won over Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.), an influential voice on defense policy who had voted with Webb and Hagel in July.

Warner's defection deflated any momentum that had been building and effectively ensured the legislation's demise. Just six Republicans supported the proposal, one fewer than the previous count.

The vote offered the most vivid evidence yet that the Bush administration still controls Iraq war policy, despite months of congressional debate, the war's persistent unpopularity and a summer-long effort by activists to pressure Republicans. Unless other options with broad appeal emerge soon -- a prospect both parties now say is unlikely -- Bush's plan to keep most troops in Iraq through next summer will remain intact.

"Our Republican colleagues are more interested in protecting our president than our troops," Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said moments before the vote, when defeat appeared certain. "This is Bush's war. Don't make it also the Republican senators' war."

more...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/19/AR2007091900915.html?hpid=topnews

[TwilightGardener]

1. This really was our best chance to start putting an end to this nonsense, AND to

protect our military from the ill effects of a shitty policy at the same time--it was a brilliant measure, and I commend both Webb and Hagel. They fought the good fight.

[babylonsister]

2. All the Dems fought hard; maybe they need to change their strategery. nt

[TwilightGardener]

3. That's just it--I thought this particular amendment was creative thinking at its best--

how do they top it? I agree the Dems are fighting--I'm not bashing them--but we need more of this type of "outside the box" thinking.

[babylonsister]

4. I wish I knew, but it seems the rethugs are whipping them at every turn.

Makes no sense that the majority party can be trampled like this. How about using some of their tactics, like filibustering? Why are they keeping the gloves on?

[TwilightGardener]

5. Sometimes I wonder if there's any way around the 60-vote requirement.

If there's any way to do that, Harry Reid should make it happen now.

[babylonsister]

6. There is, but no one wants to use it.

I have to watch this once in awhile, and then wonder what we're waiting for.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7raAL3Wld0&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eworkingassetsblog%2Ecom%2F2007%2F09%2Fthe%5Finnocent%5Fbystander%5Ffable%5Fg%2Ehtml