GOP to Dems: Pull Troops Now? Okay, then let's vote...
Troop resolution Tonight; hitting the House floor between 5:45 and 7:45...
Ultimate showdown...

IT'S A GO: IRAQ WAR SHOWDOWN IN CONGRESS: VOTE ON TROOP PULLOUT

http://www.drudgereport.com/

of course I know it will lose, nonetheless - WOW

more: http://feeds.dailykos.com/dailykos/index?m=1672

Quote :

"From the Hotline blog: We can now confirm that there will be a "Murtha Vote" later this p.m. Speaker Dennis Hastert's spokesperson Ron Bonjean tells The Hotline that it's a "vote to send a message to our American troops that we believe in their mission of fighting terrorists and we must not retreat and defeat." Angered by what he saw as House Dems "applauding but then backing off" Murtha's statement on 11/17, Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ) rose this a.m. at the House GOP Conference and suggested that they call for a vote to force Dems to show "where they stand to the American people," according to his spokesperson Larry VanHoose. Hayworth's call was met with what VanHoose described as "enthusiastic applause" from the rank-and-file GOP. Pushing aside votes on extending the tax cuts, reauthorizing the Patriot Act and a long-awaited measure on federal flood insurance, the GOP leadership has turned Hayworth's idea into a resolution and will bring it to floor of the House for a vote by 7 pm, according to senior GOP leadership sources. The question now is what Leader Pelosi and her caucus will do. After keeping her Dems in line on both major fiscal votes on 11/17, does she stick them all in cabs and push them off to DCA, IAD and BWI? Or will some Dems from conservative or military-heavy districts insist on staying and casting their "nays?" CNN is reporting that Dems are planning on having just Murtha debate the resolution, but it remains to be seen how and if the rest of the caucus votes. [JONATHAN MARTIN AND MARC AMBINDER]"

Here's the text of the resolution:

H.Res. __

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately.

Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately.

[Edited on November 18, 2005 at 4:26 PM. Reason : ,]

11/18/2005 4:17:57 PM

send in mootduff

11/18/2005 4:30:12 PM

too late to pull out

they done impregnated iraq with freedom

11/18/2005 4:30:32 PM

all this is trying to do is force everyone to show their hands
its not really about pulling out troops

11/18/2005 4:32:22 PM

I'd like to point out that JD Hayworth is a State grad.

GG JD

11/18/2005 4:35:02 PM

important points made on dk:

Quote :

"Murtha recommended getting out "as soon as practicable", i.e. with an ordered timetable; this resolution says get out "immediately". A world of difference and a difference between being a favored course of action for 19% versus 52% of the public. Second, the divided strategy is exactly what they should not do. Vote yes en masse, and defend the withdrawal position; vote no en masse and highlight the distinction I just drew; or abstain en masse b/c this is a meaningless political gesture are all superior courses of action."

Quote :

"he called for a quick reactionary force to be put in place, to help the Iraqis out. This has to be part of any resolution to be an accurate reflection of Murtha's proposal."

Quote :

"The GOP knows goddamn good and well that's not what Murtha's proposing. Pelosi should make "no" a leadership vote on this resolution, and then explain to the American people that this resolution is proof that the GOP isn't serious about the War except as a campaign slogan."

were I anyone who didn't want to give the republicans what they want, I'd abstain from the vote.

11/18/2005 4:37:02 PM

It doesnt matter if we pull out now or 10 years from now, there will be sectarian violence and finally they will decide upon a government. It will happen eiter way in the vaccuum thats created when we leave. It just depends whether we do it now, or wait several years and have thousands of more of our troops killed and permanently disfigured, and waste hundreds of billions of dollars in doing so.

11/18/2005 4:39:50 PM

Holy crap.

This is awesome. This is some West Wing style shit.

11/18/2005 4:40:01 PM

are they going to allow for amendments?

11/18/2005 4:41:21 PM

no amendments

only mootduff

11/18/2005 4:44:30 PM

The only problems I have with the idea of pulling out "immediately" as stated in the bill are

1.) that's not what most of america wants.

Quote :

" "Here are four different plans the U.S. could follow in dealing with the war in Iraq. Which ONE do you prefer? Withdraw all troops from Iraq immediately. Withdraw all troops by November 2006 -- that is, in 12 months' time. Withdraw troops, but take as many years to do this as are needed to turn control over to the Iraqis. OR, Send more troops to Iraq."

19, withdraw now
33, within 12 months
38, take as long as needed
7, send more troops

voting to withdraw now would go against what most of america wants, even if it IS what I (sort of) want

2.) withdrawing NOW wouldn't allow time to set up alternatives. I think we hsould at least have some sort of peacekeeping force (un, etc) in there to replace us, but make sure it's not a "war" anymore by pulling out combat troops from the us, britain, etc

11/18/2005 4:47:00 PM

if it were up to me we would already have the plan for pulling out ready
you know... like we were promised

11/18/2005 4:49:58 PM

if the american public's idea of pulling out worked the way the governments idea of pulling out works

thered be a lot more unwanted pregnancies

11/18/2005 4:52:26 PM

If amendments aren't permitted, everyone should abstain with the exception of the douchebags playing games here.

11/18/2005 4:56:42 PM

^^ haha

[Edited on November 18, 2005 at 4:57 PM. Reason : carat]

11/18/2005 4:56:56 PM

^^and i hate that we're calling it the "Murtha vote"

SINCE THIS IS IN NO WAY WHAT MURTHA SAID

the republican leadership is like a bunch of fucking little kids

11/18/2005 5:03:48 PM

is anyone watching the house session?

holy shit.

11/18/2005 5:12:47 PM

^I'm at work, whats going on?

I dont think its gonna happen.

11/18/2005 5:14:44 PM

I initially thought this was a clever idea on the Republicans part,

but nevermind.

11/18/2005 5:15:20 PM

The Dems will be morons if they debate on this proposed resolution. The Republicans set a trap and we'll see if the Democrats are competent enough to react appropriately.

11/18/2005 5:17:38 PM

Fuck Jean Schmidt.

11/18/2005 5:22:03 PM

I hope that that the Chair of the Armed Services committee is well liked in his district by Republicans.

It would be EASY AS PIE to wage a good campaign against him based solely on his introduction of this legislation.

11/18/2005 5:24:48 PM

Tonight Hannity will be able to get on the air and call the Dems hypocrits.

This is the only thing I see coming from the vote.

11/18/2005 5:25:24 PM

what were the inappropriate words, i turned away fora sec

11/18/2005 5:29:02 PM

I just tuned in...are they debating on the closed rule or the actual amendment?

Barney Frank's question about whether they had gotten this resolution from CBS and Dan Rather was pretty funny.

[Edited on November 18, 2005 at 5:29 PM. Reason : maybe just to me, though]

11/18/2005 5:29:17 PM

This isn't a test of any Democrat's position on the war. It's a simple test of political intelligence. Abstain from the vote until amendments are allowed and nobody can say anything.

Jean Schmidt came in and delivered the beginnings of a fiery message from a vet in her district. I heard the words "cowards cut and run" after which pretty much nothing else was discernable from yelling and shouting.

[Edited on November 18, 2005 at 5:30 PM. Reason : ...]

11/18/2005 5:29:23 PM

Alright, I'm clear now...the House is considering whether to allow a resolution on Iraq on the same day it was introduced.

11/18/2005 5:32:15 PM

I think this is a nice move. Let the people criticizing the war show it on their voting record. Not saying that's good one way or the other, just makes everyone's stance official

11/18/2005 5:36:45 PM

What the fuck are you talking about? Are you really so mentally handicapped that you can't see the difference between criticizing the war and calling for immediate fucking withdrawl?

11/18/2005 5:48:55 PM

idiots like that are why moves like this can work

11/18/2005 5:56:09 PM

"My distinguished colleagues, I'd like to start out the debate on this motion by precluding all rational thought, because dammit, I hate compromise. I say we either stay in Iraq for an indefinite period of time with no plan of attack or timetable for withdrawal, or we all pack up and leave yesterday."

11/18/2005 6:06:29 PM

He's worse than the brain damaged group who got to sound off on CSPAN while the vote on the procedural amendment was going on.

I never knew my views on this made me a traitor.

11/18/2005 6:07:25 PM

This is a bat-shit crazy thing to try and pull.

Why are the Pubs trying to pull the troops out immediatly? It's their bill after all. Any pub that votes against this is a pussy, right?

11/18/2005 6:40:28 PM

You know, sometimes I wonder who the hell to vote for. Used to be a republican. Too bad the party left me hanging.

Fucking twats.

11/18/2005 6:45:35 PM

OMF YOU MEAN YOU DIDN'T HEAR? THIS IS WORD FOR WORD MURTHA'S RESOLUTION!!!1

11/18/2005 6:45:53 PM

No shit. If that's the case then have at it. Tag on the McCain ammendment while you're at it.

The republicans are still twats though. They've let alot of people down with this kind of shit. They've been in charge of all branches of govenment and just continue to fuck things up.


Who's a fan of divided government? Me.

11/18/2005 6:56:03 PM

Uhm...I was being facetious. The GOP resolution is a categorical misrepresentation of Murtha's resolution.

11/18/2005 6:57:17 PM

I am watching John Murtha's press conference on C-SPAN and he's absolutely right about everything.

11/18/2005 6:58:20 PM

Gotta admit, I haven't heard a mistep yet. This is the first time I've actually heard him.

11/18/2005 6:59:27 PM

Then never the fuck mind. The last I heard was they were pulling the either/or vote. What a fucking crock of shit.

This is the worst kind of grandstanding. I hope the Democrats can get some leadership (not bloody fucking likely) and get control of the house in '06. Then give them the chance to fuck things up.

Mix it up a little, you know.

11/18/2005 7:00:15 PM

So if I understand Murtha, we would have our troops poised somewhere outside of Iraq ready to go in and fight the insurgents if they get too out of hand.

I guess I'm ok with this as long as we actually do go back in as needed. We have made progress in the country, and I both want to preserve that progress as well as getting our troops out of the daily cross-hairs.

But I would put the Iraqi go'vt on notice that they better get their act together and find a way to protect themselves. Give the Iraqi leaders a secret time-frame of our exit.

Let's Give It a Try.

11/18/2005 7:00:36 PM

I'm with you on principle EarthDogg, but do you really trust that our administration can keep ANYTHING a fucking secret?

[Edited on November 18, 2005 at 7:04 PM. Reason : btw - Murtha's resolution is not being voted on, debated, or even discussed tonight.]

11/18/2005 7:02:44 PM

What, and have some sort of clear agenda in this clusterfuck? Obtainable and measurable goals? Perish the thought.

11/18/2005 7:04:25 PM

So which of my hardcore republican friends wants to defend putting up a vote just to vote it down as a show of politics?

11/18/2005 7:19:56 PM

Paging the following: TGD, Smoker4, TKEshultz, abonorio, & Wlfpk4Life

11/18/2005 7:27:37 PM

Quote :

"If amendments aren't permitted, everyone should abstain with the exception of the douchebags playing games here."

Abstaining would be even worse than voting--in fact it would be characteristic of what makes the Democrats weak: a muddling unwillingness to take a stand on anything. They can't send their highly respected spokesman to the fore, and then back down from his apparent position (which, as Gamecat noted, is not precisely what he said, but it's close enough IMO).

The Democrats should categorically vote for immediate pullout.

Why not? Quite obviously the Democrats' biggest problem in American politics is the lack of any strategic initiative in any direction whatsoever. They are chaotic.

Clearly Murtha came forth to demand a pull-out because the opinion polls have shown that Americans view the Iraq war as not worthwhile, more so than ever. Surely he didn't just realize yesterday that, holy shit, Iraq sucks for the troops who are there.

So if the Democrats want to gain some traction and take a stand, this is their chance. The GOP leadership isn't counting on them to stand up for the wrong position, they are counting on showing the American people -- once again -- that the Democrats have no solid opposition stance other than myriad voices all tugging at each other chaotically.

And, I will take this moment to add -- the call for a pull-out is a disgraceful position, from Murtha or whomever echoes it. In my view that goes without saying, but we've had this argument before.

11/18/2005 7:41:04 PM

Quote :

"Abstaining would be even worse than voting--in fact it would be characteristic of what makes the Democrats weak: a muddling unwillingness to take a stand on anything."

So naturally, they should take the stand outlined for them by the GOP?

That argument doesn't wash and you know it. The GOP doesn't get to decide what position the Democrats take.

They should abstain on the grounds that no amendments to the resolution are allowed, AND SAY AS MUCH.

Quote :

"They can't send their highly respected spokesman to the fore, and then back down from his apparent position (which, as Gamecat noted, is not precisely what he said, but it's close enough IMO)."

Apparent to whom? To the dillemic "with us/against us" crowd who only hears two things: "withdrawl immediately" or "wave a flag until we have no money left to spend or blood left to spill?"

With respect, that crowd doesn't deserve to be appeased.

Murtha's position is to pull out as soon as is practicable, not as soon as humanly possible. This not only isn't "close enough" to what he propsed, it's not even in the same area code.

Quote :

"The Democrats should categorically vote for immediate pullout."

Why should they? It's a blatantly irresponsible vote to make and even Nancy Pelosi knows it; she's advised her caucus to vote against it.

It's as if you're ignoring the fact that the lion's share of them wouldn't have agreed to an immediate pullout even if it were introduced by a Democrat.

Quote :

"Why not? Quite obviously the Democrats' biggest problem in American politics is the lack of any strategic initiative in any direction whatsoever. They are chaotic."

No, their problem has been that they have let the Republicans shape the debate for too long. And now you suggest that they continue to do so, and call it a strategic initiative.

Quote :

"So if the Democrats want to gain some traction and take a stand, this is their chance. The GOP leadership isn't counting on them to stand up for the wrong position, they are counting on showing the American people -- once again -- that the Democrats have no solid opposition stance other than myriad voices all tugging at each other chaotically."

If that's what they intended to show, they would have put _Murtha's_ resolution to a vote. Or at the very least, allowed amendments to the resolution.


[Edited on November 18, 2005 at 7:59 PM. Reason : ...]

11/18/2005 7:44:05 PM

I agree that they should have voted yes to this measure. Take a damn stand.

I'd like for my republican brothers to take a stand and explain why they (rhetorically speaking) would put up some bullshit measure like this if they plan to immediatly vote it down. That's leadership?

Murtha's plan didn't sound all that flaky. Vote on that. I'd hate to have some real matrix to work off of, other than "when the Iraqi's can rest on the warm bosom of freedom" or somesuch.

I do like me some bosoms though.

11/18/2005 7:53:44 PM

Quote :

"Abstaining would be even worse than voting--in fact it would be characteristic of what makes the Democrats weak: a muddling unwillingness to take a stand on anything. They can't send their highly respected spokesman to the fore, and then back down from his apparent position (which, as Gamecat noted, is not precisely what he said, but it's close enough IMO)."

I agree they should not vote. And nobody would back from shit. This isn't even a law. It's a statement. Formulated by the Republicans, and timed as is convenient to the Republicans. They should absolutely refuse to have anything to do with that. My opinion is that they should all come out say that they unanimously demand a timetable, and then refuse to vote.

11/18/2005 7:59:53 PM

They should basically march in and introduce a resolution declaring the president is doing "a heckuva job," allow no amendments, and force the GOP Congressmen to vote on that.

11/18/2005 8:01:25 PM