Senate's Iraq Debate Ends In Deadlock

Democrats Fall 4 Votes Short Of Moving Forward With Resolution

(CBS/AP)  The Senate gridlocked on the Iraq war in a sharply worded showdown on Saturday as Republicans foiled a Democratic attempt to rebuke President Bush over his deployment of 21,500 additional combat troops.

The vote was 56-34. That was four short of the 60 needed to advance the measure, which is identical to a nonbinding resolution that Democrats pushed through the House on Friday.

"The Senate, on behalf of the American people, must make it clear to the commander in chief that he no longer has a rubber stamp in Iraq," said Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., in the final moments before the vote.

Republicans blasted him and the Democratic leadership for refusing to allow a vote on an alternative that ruled out any reduction in money for troops in the field.

"A vote in support of the troops that is silent on the question of funds is an attempt to have it both ways," said Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the GOP leader. "So we are asking for an honest and open debate."

The vote marked the second time this winter that Senate Republicans have blocked action on nonbinding measures critical of the president's war policies. This time, however, there were signs of restlessness within the GOP.

Seven Republicans broke with their leadership, compared with only two on the previous test vote.

Also this time, the maneuvering concerned a nonbinding measure that disapproved of Bush's decision to deploy the additional troops and pledged to support and protect the troops.

The vote in the House on Friday was 246-182, with 17 Republicans breaking ranks to support the measure and two Democrats voting in opposition.

Saturday's debate and vote occurred in an intensely political environment, both in and out of the Capitol.

It sent some members scurrying back to Washington, D.C., from what was to have been a long holiday weekend, reports CBS News correspondent Joie Chen. Some presidential wannabees bailed out of big campaign appearances. Because although nobody thought the measure had a chance of passing, most senators couldn’t risk the political backlash they’d face for not showing up.

One of them, Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, squeezed in a morning appearance in New Hampshire, where she told one audience, "We have to end this war and we can't do it without Republican votes."

Polls show strong public opposition to the war, which as killed more than 3,100 U.S. troops. Democrats seemed eager to force Republicans into votes that might prove politically troublesome.

"They are torn between their president's policy and the wishes of the constituents, but vote they must," said Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, head of the Senate Democrats' campaign committee.

Democrats in both the House and Senate have said the nonbinding measures would be only the first attempt to force a shift in Bush's war policies.

In the Senate, Reid has told lawmakers he will turn anti-terrorism legislation into a forum for debate over the war. He has met privately in recent days with fellow Democrats as the leadership plans its next move.

In the House, Democrats have said they will attempt to place restrictions on Bush's request for an additional $93 billion for the military in an attempt to make it impossible for him to deploy all 21,500 additional troops.

Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., has described a series of provisions that would require the Pentagon to meet certain standards for training and equipping the troops, and for making sure they have enough time at home between deployments.

Murtha and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., describe these provisions as designed to protect the troops.

Republicans argue the effect would be to deny troops needed reinforcements and are expected to try to block the restrictions.

[forthepeaple]

does everyone relise that if something would happen to any place in america right now we couldn't handle it. and it will happen make no dout about that. no one is lineing up to sign up in our services because they now relise that there goverment will not be there to help them. you will see the draft come back and when all the senators kids and grandkids have to go fight somewhere we dont belong only then will you see them fight. to all those senators that want to follow th pres/vp may god bless you,before he shouts the perly gates in your faces. you all are a disgrace to this country. and if you think we should stay and fight than i want to here you say i volunteer to take any servicemans/womans place so they can see there first born. lets see if any one will do that

[rharrin1]

After 2008 the dems.will not need any republicans to crossover to have their 60 votes.

[selenite1]

to processor2 :

I have read this same comment posted repeatedly without alteration.

You require professional help.

[processor2]

So, the socialist/marxist/leninists (aka Democrats)that have seized control of congress last November wants to vote on the surrender of our country.

This resolution is a disaster of historical proportions.

The Democrap Party today will show the world what wimps and whiners that Democrats really are.

Heaven help us.

....

SOMETIMES I WONDER IF LIBERALISM ISN'T A MENTAL DISORDER.....most people I know are a glass is half-full kind of people, whereas liberals see nothing but doom, gloom, and surrender.


UNLIKE YOU LIBERALS,,,,,,I do not advocate putting our tails between our legs and running like the cowardly Dummycrats are proposing.

[musty2u]

Enjoy, enjoy

[gdmoore2]

Senate Democrats need to work harder to find that boundary between the extreme neocon Republicans and the traditional centrist Republicans. Seven Republicans voted in favor of cloture. Nine Republicans abstained, and of those, some are sending a signal of moderation. Senate Democrats should ease a bit right and help those Buchanan Republicans take back their Grand Old Party.

[notblue]

According to new CBS polls this morning, two thirds of Americans are not pleased with the way the Iraq conflict has gone but at the same time two thirds of Americans do not beleive we should cut funds to the troops saying it would send the wrong signal to the troops. So all you losers that think you know what America wants need to listen to your own leftwing news channel a little closer. All this crapp going on in congress which is nothing more than meaningless do nothing POLITICS will not benefit the Amarican people or the troops presnetly trying to fight this war. They need stopp wasting tax payers money and stop playing to the lefwing mainstream media.

[sandy994]

The Republicans in the Senate who obstructed a vote on the resolution will pay dearly in the next election. Trouble is, can we wait that long?
But then as someone said, Revenge is best served cold. 2008 is going to be a very cold year for Senate Republicans.

[bluestardad]

Email your senators and representatives tell them your views! http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_in
formation/senators_cfm.cfm or http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/

[mbcsmith]

Latest poll on cutting funding for troops. 60% AGAINST.

[selenite1]

It strains credulity how a vote of no confidence for a criminally incompetent President and a criminal administration translates as a vote of no confidence for the troops.

Partition Iraq, bring the troops home, kick the bums out of office and sue them for every missing dollar.

[observantx]

The American people may be many things, but they're not stupid.
Posted by Gladys_Over at 08:17 AM : Feb 19, 2007


Unfortunately there were just enough of the stupid, unthinking, brainwashed, gingoistic, blindly loyal ones to have elected our current Failure in Chief a second thime.

it remainsd to be seen if any of them have learned anything over the past six years.

[deardemocrat]

To BLUESTARDAD:

I agree with all points you make, except one: your mixed metaphor on Israel.

I too, can no longer deal with anything about conservacrat Joe Lieberman. And I am aware that AIPAC is an extremely strong lobby, and would indeed guess that is due to much of the membership being Armageddon-bound right-wing Christian.

Yet, that doesn't scare me (a Jewish , liberal Democrat) any more than extreme left-wingers like the anti-Zionist (and possibly anti-semitic) Jimmy Carter. [By the way, the noun "Semitist" you use should be either Zionist or Semite.]

I am also glad that most moderate Christians also support Israel. And I am sad that too many Jews believe they have to be Republicans to muster support for Israel.

History is certain that Israel has never been the agressor, and by anbody's bible, defending yourself is good & righteous.

And please know ... there's not a single American Jew that "would gladly sell thousands of American soldiers lives to promote Israeli interest!", as you say.

RonP, founder, www.DearDemocrat.com

[bluestardad]

GUYS YOU GOTTA READ THIS!

http://www.aipac.org/forms/join_aipacClubs.htm


The Elite Minyan group - you mean for a minimum of only $100,000 dollars
a year I too can shape world policy? Tell me more!

I especially like the bit about enjoying "the exclusivity you deserve."

This thing borders on parody, but alas, unfortunately it is all too real.

[hhusted]

If Bush is not impeached now, he will be gone after 2008. But the problem is can we wait till then? By that time this country could be in a war we don't want. I say get rid of Bush now and be done with it. He's stupid anyway. He has no sense of morals and he sure can't think that's for sure.

[bluestardad]

You may have noticed the coming surge of American public opinion against using our military to promote the agenda of other Countries! American people are learning it is ok to disagree with a President who is friends of Saudi Arabia and who gives them special treatment on the world stage at the expense of American lives. For years no one would say anything against promoting the Israeli agenda for fear of being labeled an anti-Semitist but now America is learning it is also acceptable to disagree with Israeli promoters like AIPAC members, Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and William Kristol of the Weekly Standard who would gladly sell thousands of American soldiers lives to promote Israeli interest! Now these same policies and neocons are pushing our soldiers toward another war in Iran. American military is made to protect American interest not fight proxy wars in the interest of other countries! American blood and treasure should be spent only in American interest! The Current Vice President of the United States felt the need to jump on a plane on a moments notice and fly to Saudi Arabia at the beckon call of the house of Saudi. He showed the world by his actions who his true masters were! As for the Rest of us Americans, The Statue of Liberty Stands in New York Harbor and is not Kneeling in the desert of the Middle East!

[formrusmcsgt]

Gladys_Over -

Giulani, like Hillary, has too much baggage to make it through the White House front door.....

[gladys_over]

RE: "There's no way they'll walk away from this fiasco."

If Republicans really think they can just nominate Rudy Giuliani (whose entire campaign, I predict, will be "I was really cool on 9/11") and tiptoe through the tulips back into the White House, they are seriously deluded.

The American people may be many things, but they're not stupid.

[bluestardad]

There are right now Navy Seamen being used in the role of Combat Infantrymen in Iraq because the Marines and Army are stretched so thin. These Seamen get a rush thru Small Unit training program and are given a rifle and are integrated into combat arms maneuver units.

[formrusmcsgt]

There's no way they'll walk away from this fiasco.
Posted by Gladys_Over at 08:05 AM : Feb 19, 2007

Bush is already trying to. He's blaming the failure in Afghanistan on NATO and the failure in Iraq on the Iraqis themselves and Iran.

It's everyone's fault but George's.......