MSNBC: Senate rejects bill calling for start of Iraq troop withdrawal within 120 days

* banner @ top of page

We don't have that much of a majority.

a simple majority on votes, except when the minority filibusters to prevent a vote.

I think the Senate should go back to the old school filibuster rules where to go through a filibuster they would actually have to get up and speak forever and ever. This gentlemanly filibuster BS is BS.

This is also important, because since the bill hasn't actually been voted on, it is still there to vote on later and to bring up again and again.

Not that I'll hold my breath.

But the report says 60 needed to pass, not to invoke cloture. What gives there?

is happening.

and keep putting it up for vote.......this isn't done yet!

At least it actually got to a vote. Although as there is no story, that is difficult to tell.

There is only one legislative action that the Democratic Congress can take that would have any chance to alter the war policies of this administration: the house can vote no on the next war appropriations bill.

:(

I will make phone calls once I know. This is bullshit.

Lieberman to express my disappointment. Went w/a real person v. voice mail. I told him that Lieberman can't continue to recycle troops like he's doing, that folks w/a lot of problems were headed stateside (the 1AD is part of BRAC and will be stationed in TX), and the US does not have the infrastructure set up to help these people with the care they are going to need. I said the soldiers think the war is a joke, they don't want to go back, and those currently stateside are nervous about getting the call. THEY DO NOT WANT TO GO.

And then I anecdoted with personal accounts that I knew about.

Aide was politely indifferent.

NT!

Democrats aggressively challenged President Bush's Iraq policy at both ends of the Capitol on Thursday, gaining House committee approval for a troop withdrawal deadline of Sept. 1, 2008, but suffering defeat in the Senate on a less sweeping plan to end U.S. participation in the war.

(snip)
I want this war to end. I don't want to go to any more funerals," said New York Rep. Rep. Jose Serrano (news, bio, voting record), one of several liberal Democrats who have pledged their support for the legislation despite preferring a faster end to the war.

"Nobody wants our troops out of Iraq more than I do, countered Rep. C.W. Bill Young (news, bio, voting record) of Florida, who sought unsuccessfully to scuttle the timeline for a troop withdrawal. "But we can't afford to turn over Iraq to al-Qaida."

In the Senate, after weeks of skirmishing, Republicans easily turned back Democratic legislation requiring a troop withdrawal to begin within 120 days. The measure set no fixed deadline for completion of the redeployment, but set a goal of March 31, 2008. The vote was 50-48 against the measure, 12 short of the 60 needed for passage.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070315/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq

The only certainty is that we WILL be KICKED OUT.

How long do we WISH TO bleed-out our troop strength and tax dollars to the Corporate War Profiteers?

More to the point: how long CAN we afford this imperial escapade?

GET THE TROOPS OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST NOW!!!

The only words I can find are, "Greedy, Gutless, and/or Clueless Dumb-ass Legislators."

NT!

Hell, they could do it in the Green Zone. We would soon find out how keen people really are to hang around there.

:banghead:

...should be suited up immediately for transport to Iraq. If they want to stay, then let THEM literally remain in that hellhole of their own creation. Evil bastards. :grr:

no ifs ands about it......the troops are worn thin...we are sending in troops that are hurt .physically and mentally.

A mention of the Draft coming on the Senate floor would make these assholes change their tune.

Leave mine alone. My family will become refugees before I'll sacrifice my kids to this madness.

what I mean is....if there were mention of a draft.....we would not be seeing this happening........no body wants their family members sent to Iraq...yet.....the poeple in government see nothing wrong with putting the lives of our kids on the line.and they are not giving up a damn thing.........

If you are proposing legislation to reactivate the draft I am 100% against you. Even if you are doing so only to 'scare us straight', that is to bring it up in the misguided belief that it would never be agreed to or that the war would magically end if it were enacted, I still am 100% opposed.

NT!

The system works. Now our troops can continue to do their jobs without distraction.

It should have been 50-49, given the known votes and Johnson's illness. Who was the other person on our side who didn't vote? Not that it really matters, as unless we swing another two or three Republican votes, we're stalled, all things considered.

Johnson and Mccain no vote.

Our garden needs a little more weeding.

Nelson's aide was did care (as opposed to Lieberman's), listened intently, took notes, was very interested in what was personally going on w/troops over here in Germany once returning from Iraq, and asked if there was anything else I wanted (Jim Nicholson gone).

I called Pryor's office, said the same things as w/Nelson and Lieberman, and the aide said that in Pryor's defense, he had proposed an amendment that the timetable be classified, but amendments were not considered. Pryor felt that keeping the withdrawal a secret would protect the troops.

I said that troop presence in Iraq was in itself a detriment. The Iraqis do not want them there. Everybody knows that, and that it doesn't protect the troops if the Iraqis think they're never going to leave. Make it public, act on it, and THAT will protect troops. I said the troops DO NOT want to be deployed again! They're exhausted.

I also said that Jim Nicholson (VA Sec.) needed to go the way of Gonzales, and I explained why.

Both Nelson and Pryor's offices pursued my commentary and let me speak at length. I said both senators needed to listen to Murtha, as I was sure 1AD folks were in touch w/him re: their concerns.

too pissed (not at you!)

If we can't get 60 votes to end the war, where are we going to get the full 67 needed to impeach?

What a bunch of dopes.

and the ordinary man on the street who expected change (in other words not politically junkies like we are) is just going to think the Dems are inept and unable to live up to their billing. Well,...... I don't see the Dems holding Congress very long at this rate.

right now. The Pukes killed it, so of course you "don't see the Dems holding Congress very long at this rate.". Thanks for your input.

They can still run on minimum wage, etc. And what are the Republicans going to do? Run ads saying the Dems couldn't break their filibuster to withdraw troops, vote Republican?

All the media talks about is how the dems control the House and Senate. During the past elections all we ever spoke about is how we'll end the war if we were elected, "we'd stop the funding". ...The public will think we dropped the ball. ...And if Bush takes us into Iran, we'll be screwed.

That was my point- what the 'average man on the street', who pays little attention to the details, thinks. Not what political junkies know to be true. The regular guy and gal do not dwell on how many votes are needed (60 or 51?) for what proposals, who was absent and why, and all the minutae. All they know and remember is the bottom line- that the Dems said they would stop Bush and little has been done if anything to do that, plus he now even can go into Iran without asking Congress for permission (at least as of today).

You and I know why things may be going as they are; but the average voter does not know or care. They only know what they think they were promised.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/16/washington/16cong.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

WASHINGTON, March 15 — The Senate on Thursday rejected a Democratic resolution to withdraw most American combat troops from Iraq in 2008, but a similar measure advanced in the House, and Democratic leaders vowed to keep challenging President Bush to change course in Iraq.

The vote in the Senate was 50 against and 48 in favor, 12 short of what was needed to pass, with just a few defections in each party. It came just hours after the House Appropriations Committee, in another vote largely on party lines, approved an emergency spending bill for Iraq and Afghanistan that includes a timeline for withdrawal from Iraq. The House will vote on that legislation next Thursday, setting the stage for another confrontation.

The action in both houses threw into sharp relief the Democratic strategy of ratcheting up the pressure, vote by vote, to try to force the White House to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq. But it also highlighted Republican unity in opposition; in the Senate, only one Republican, Gordon H. Smith of Oregon, voted with the Democrats.

more.....

We tried to stop it and the killing of our troops.

The GOP thumbed their noses at the American public and continue their rubber stamping.

it's just the reality of continued war that sucks...