Boehner: All House Members ‘Except One Voted To Send Our Troops Into Iraq’
Boehner: All House Members ‘Except One Voted To Send Our Troops Into Iraq’
During a floor speech this afternoon, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) claimed that only one member of the House of Representatives voted against the 2002 resolution authorizing the invasion in Iraq.
Decrying the “political games” being played, Boehner said, wagging his finger, “I’m going to remind all of my colleagues that all of our members in this chamber, except one — all of our members in this chamber, Democrat and Republican, except one — voted to send our troops to Iraq.” Watch it:
As Mcjoan noted, John Boehner is out to lunch. Fully 133 members of the House voted against the Iraq war authorization. Boehner’s current counterpart, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), said in 2002, “If we resolve this issue diplomatically, we can show our strength as a great country. Let us show our greatness. Vote no on this resolution.”
(Boehner is having a bad day. During the same speech, he claimed, “The Senate leaders, Democrat and Republican, have made it clear that [Bush's escalation] plan has no chance.” Actually, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell supports the escalation.)
Transcript:
BOEHNER: Why do we have to play more political games? The president of the United States has made it clear that he will veto this bill. The senate leaders, Democrat and Republican, have made it clear that this plan has no chance, in the other chamber. But yet here we are playing political games while our troops are fighting for our freedom and our safety in Iraq. I’m not going to go through all the reasons why Iraq is important. I have been through them before. I think every member of this chamber understands that Iraq is important to the safety and security of the United States. But I’m going to remind all of my colleagues that all of our members in this chamber, except one — all of our members in this chamber, Democrat and Republican, except one — voted to send our troops to Iraq. There they have been locked in a battle for the safety and security of Americans, helping to try to build democracy to bring more stability to the Middle East.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Selective memory is a terrible waste of a mind. FumbDuck.
May 10th, 2007 at 10:06 pmI got a real charge yesterday after watching Boner on CNN…
…I called Boner’s Washington, D.C. office…
… his receptionist (a woman) sounded really overwhelmed…
…she tried to transfer me to the “comments” line after I told her that Boner was a coward and TRAITOR…
…they must have been getting a lot of negative calls…
…she really sounded exasperated…
May 10th, 2007 at 10:08 pmRepublicans lie. All the time, without compunction.
May 10th, 2007 at 10:09 pmMore lies from the Crime family and evil empire. Thank God these crazy bastards are not in the majority any longer and thank God the GOP is so over they will never have a majority again.
May 10th, 2007 at 10:09 pmi doubt it’s selective memory – to me, it’s pure propaganda and it’s intentional. These people take the tricks for Goebbels and use them here in the US – repeat the lie often enough, and some people are going to believe it.
This guy’s no dummy. I consider it a calculated move to lessen resistance to the war. Gut feeling…..
The reality, though, plenty of people voted against this resolution, and we need more people with courage to stand up and end this war now.
Only when this country focuses on a national DE-fense rather than a national OF-fense will we ever have peace, security and prosperity. for us – and not the politicians and their corporate backers.
Some reading:
“National Defense vs. National Offense”
May 10th, 2007 at 10:12 pmhttp://www.populistamerica.com/national_defense_vs__national_offense
Was C-SPAN camera on?!
May 10th, 2007 at 10:14 pmGingrich was good at playing C-SPAN cameras.
Do you support the troops? Take my poll here.
May 10th, 2007 at 10:15 pmUmm … That was WWII. One member of the House famously voted “No” on declaring to go to war with Japan; not because they disagreed with declaring war on Japan, but because they didn’t want it ever to be said that the United States voted unanimously to go to war. So either he’s having some kind of weird time-warp version of Alzheimer’s, or he’s a, what’s the word I’m looking for … Oh: LIAR!
May 10th, 2007 at 10:17 pmBoner needs to spend a little less time in the tanning bed.
Just sayin’
May 10th, 2007 at 10:19 pmNICO: At the end of your post, you write that Boehner says that both Senate leaders have said that Bush’s excalation plan has no chance; that is not the case. Boehner clearly said that the leaders feel the particular Iraq legislation being debated has no chance. Just thought I’d let ya know. As for Boehners real blunder, he’s obviously switched the Iraq resolution with the 2001 Afghan bill, which did only have one nay vote in the House. Barbara Lee of CA, I believe. Not that I’m defending the guy; he’s a jackass, for sure.
May 10th, 2007 at 10:20 pmWhy does everyone have to be so mean? This guy has been having a string of bad days. Since about January of this year…
May 10th, 2007 at 10:21 pmeven if he is referring to the post 9/11 vote, the same 435 people arent in this congress.
hes just gone crazy.
what do you expect from a guy named boner?
May 10th, 2007 at 10:30 pmWhen two vowels go walkin…the first one does the talkin…BBBBoehner.
May 10th, 2007 at 10:30 pmI’ll bet he reeks of Gin.
Defending Calvert has used the last of his feeble brain cells.
May 10th, 2007 at 10:33 pmWhy let the facts get in the way of reality at this point?
May 10th, 2007 at 10:33 pmLet’s be fair….I hate that GOP puppeteer Boehner as much as everyone…but I think he was referring to the House GOP at that time. One voted against the war….conversely, only on GOP Senator (Lincoln Chaffey) voted against the war also at that time. Both of these two lost elections since…So hey, let’s not degrade ourselves down to the level of the GOP smear monkey chickenhawks…The supporters of the party of good should set the example not follow their failed path to losersville…
May 10th, 2007 at 10:40 pmJohn von Neuman said of primative societies that the concept of counting consisted of two very basic concepts – one and more than one. We know now that geese are capable of counting gooslings at a span of up to nine or eleven. This must surely mean that John Boehner has mathematical abilities somewhere between that of a caveman and a goose, biased towards the lower end.
May 10th, 2007 at 10:41 pmIf this pompous,ill informed and over-tanned poor imitation of Jimmy Stewart was my Congressman I would move to another district…I happen to live in a district represented since last election by the doltish son of the previous congressman (who had what is probably the least distinguished 26 or so years in the HOuse, a dumb peasant who was not fit for any other job)and I am not happy about it, but at least MY idiot has enough sense to know he should just sit and be quiet and vote with the bush mafia. Bonehead looks like a sleazy drunken used car salesman to me.
May 10th, 2007 at 10:50 pmAh, come on ya’ll. Leave Boner alone. Anybody with that bad of a name is already a tortured individual.
Maybe after he’s kicked out of his seat in the next election he can do commercials for Viagra.
May 10th, 2007 at 10:54 pmWhat a no Boehner!
May 10th, 2007 at 10:55 pm#18 – jillflamboyant,
May 10th, 2007 at 10:58 pmThis twerp looks as much like Jimmy Stewart as I do Twiggy! Check my Facepage.
John von Neuman said of primative societies that the concept of counting consisted of two very basic concepts – one and more than one.
And our computers also operate on a 1 and 0. Yet between 1 and Zero lies a midpoint. Thus 1 and 0 make 3. And is what is wrong with our current computer systems. They are binary, like Republicans. Like or Hate.
Whereas others say hey wait a minute, there is something to that chicken egg shell theory afterall then.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:00 pmYes, and so the majority were wrong before and they are getting smarter by the day.
Fine, where are the Republicans who talked so bravely about victory over Al Quaeda today on the floor, but were advising the President to compromise?
Everyone knows that the only reason Al Quaeda is in Iraq is a for a chance to attack Americans. Their organization (unlike Hamas and others) have no plans or ability for takeover or governance. THey are only good at disrupption and terrorizing. They have no hopes of gaining Iraqi influence in the long run.
So let’s get out and get Al Quaeda get out too. Go back to attacknig their base and stop making up stories and myths about this so called organization “AL Quaida in Iraq”. It is the most rag tag non-descript, unorganized, straw man group in the world. It only exists as a phantom argument to keep us involved in Iraq forever.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:02 pmTime to start polishing the guillotines
May 10th, 2007 at 11:10 pmRon Paul ftw? :-)
May 10th, 2007 at 11:16 pm#21 – Zep Tepi,
May 10th, 2007 at 11:38 pmNothing wrong about 1 and zero. That is the basis of modern sound systems. Just put a feedback circuit around an inverter and you can mold perfect sound. When I was a child, it was called the Williamson amplifier. The neat part was watching the electrons dancing in the beam pentodes among the inert gases left behind by the flashing process.
Saddam was notorious for looking the other way while terrorist training went on in his country. The no-fly zone which protected the Kurdish north in Iraq from Iraqi military incursions didn’t stop al-Zarqawi from operating a large training camp. Saddam was well aware of al-Zarqawi’s training camp in northern Iraq and did nothing to shut it down. He could have with his secret police force but chose not to. He could have even called on the U.S. or Britian to help him put the camp out of business in the late 1990s but he didn’t. Why? Al-Zarqawi was already responsible for planning to kill Americans and Israelis in Jordan in 1999…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Musab_al-Zarqawi
“Upon his release from prison in 1999, Zarqawi was involved in an attempt to blow up the Radisson SAS Hotel in Amman, where many Israeli and American tourists lodged”
“There is no doubt that Zarqawi then traveled to Iraq to have his wounded leg treated at a hospital run by Uday Hussein.”
In regards to H.J.RES.64…
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/107/house/1/votes/342/
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d107:HJ00064:@@@D&summ2=m&
“….or harbored SUCH organizations or persons, in order to prevent any FUTURE acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations, or persons”
In other words H.J.RES.64, in which every member of congress voted for except one, didn’t limit all necessary action strictly to al Qaeda. The resolution never even mentioned al Qaeda. In fact the resolution was in response to ALL terrorist organizations that might attack the U.S., it’s allies, or it’s interests in the future. Al-Zarqawi, a wanted terrorist for attacks against American’s and Israeli’s in 1999, and his associates Ansar al-Islam had connections to Saddam because they were actively engaged in fighting the PUK…which obviously Saddam had no problem with for obvious reasons. It’s also no coincidence that Al-Zarqawi quickly became one the the main leaders of terrorist operations against those Iraqis who supported the U.S. toppling Saddam’s regime.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ansar_al-Islam
“On April 21, 2002, the Telegraph.co.uk reported
Members of Saddam’s Republican Guard have been seen in two villages run by militants from Ansar al-Islam inside Iraqi Kurdistan, an area which is otherwise controlled by anti-Saddam factions. They were sighted by Western military advisers on a reconnaissance mission. ‘Five large trucks coming from Jalawla [in Baghdad-controlled Iraq] unloaded arms and weapons in the Halabjah area,’ said one witness. ‘They were taken to hides and caves in the mountains.’ The haul is said to have included machine-guns, anti-personnel mines and C4 plastic explosive. Links between Ansar al-Islam and Saddam were also alleged recently by Qassem Hussein Mohamed, who claims that he worked for Baghdad’s Mukhabarat intelligence for 20 years. Saddam had clandestinely supported Ansar al-Islam for several years, he said. ‘[Ansar] and al-Qa’eda groups were trained by graduates of the Mukhabarat’s School 999 – military intelligence.’”
Saddam was harboring and giving safe haven to terroists like al Zarqawi who as stated as a matter of fact earlier was responsible for planning attacks against Americans and American interests in 1999.
May 10th, 2007 at 11:50 pmDo ANY Republicans have the capability of telling the truth? Or, at least remembering facts which are documented and can’t be refuted? They continue to amaze me.
Go ahead, drink the kool-aid! Drink it!
May 10th, 2007 at 11:55 pmBoehner is a boner, so nothing more needs to be said about him!
May 11th, 2007 at 12:12 amThat tanning bed is cooking your little brain, beener.
May 11th, 2007 at 1:17 amyou have to repeat it enough times for it to be true, here let me tap my Ruby slippers together and make it true….click…..click…..click…..guess these size 13 triple Es don’t make the magic happen….sigh
Hating the Repukian Mafia daily
May 11th, 2007 at 1:20 amThis neocon talking point is SOOO worn out…. They do walk in lock step with one another….
Boehner and to all the other freaks: They bought the lies…
May 11th, 2007 at 1:25 amTracy, please bring something up that HASN’T been debunked. Or leave.
May 11th, 2007 at 1:35 amYeah, Saddam was a big friend of the Kurd’s, who were harboring al Zarkowi. Tracy, grow a brain, already.
May 11th, 2007 at 1:36 amBoner is a one term leader.
May 11th, 2007 at 1:36 amThat was not an oversight or a “gaff” by House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH).
It was an outright, premeditated, deliberate lie by the most infamous LIAR (and Abramoff bed-buddy) in Congress.
When BoneHead Boehner does something besides LIE through his teeth and take bribes, well THAT is NEWS!!!
May 11th, 2007 at 3:49 am“Saddam was notorious for looking the other way while terrorist training went on in his country.”
• The U.S. CENTCOM looked the other way when Gen. Schwartzkopf gave Hussein use of his military helicopters and he used them to commit genocide against the Marsh Arabs.
“Al-Zarqawi was already responsible for planning to kill Americans and Israelis in Jordan in 1999…”
When Bush put Ustad Allawi into power, he ignored the fact that Allawi had bombed movie houses and taxicabs in Baghdad, and the fact that on the day he took power, he strode up to six uncharged detainees and shot them pointblank with his own pistol, saying “This is how you do it.”
• The Coalition of the Willing deployed at least 130,000 mercenaries with a total legal waiver. Googling the name ‘Strydom’ and ‘Iraq’ will show you proof that these mercenary outfits hired South African terrorists, and it is known that terrorists from Indonesia, Argentina, and Guatemala (as well as others) have been deployed into Operation Iraqi Freedom.
• Posada Carriles, a known terrorist who blew up the first airliner in the W. Hemisphere, and who was arrested in Panama in possession of C-4, is out walking around in the U.S.
“Upon his release from prison in 1999, Zarqawi was involved in an attempt to blow up the Radisson SAS Hotel in Amman, where many Israeli and American tourists lodgedâ€
• We now know that the U.S. tank officer who fired at the Baghdad hotel with the journalists, kililng one man, was under orders to do so, and knew the noncombatant status of the hotel, and that the claim it was after being fired upon has been fully debunked.
“In other words H.J.RES.64, in which every member of congress voted for except one, didn’t limit all necessary action strictly to al Qaeda.”
That’s a good thing, because when Bush deployed 1,500 troops to Tora Bora, he let Bin Laden and his crew escape.
“In fact the resolution was in response to ALL terrorist organizations that might attack the U.S., it’s allies, or it’s interests in the future.”
Terrorist organizations who were enabled by Bush to loot “tens of thousands of tons” of materiel, including the artillery shells and C-4 used for the IEDs that are killing our troops and the population of major cities in Iraq. This act of invading Iraq with insufficient troops to control the materiel in that country, which we knew about before we invaded in great detail — this single act was Bush’s response to all terrorist organizations that might attack us.
• BUSH ARMED OUR ENEMIES.
May 11th, 2007 at 4:40 amDon’t forget, wingers live in a delusional Bizarro World. They hire right-wing think tanks to cook the facts for them; they have right-wing news sources make up the news they want to hear. They’re not lying per see, just telling the “truth” as they see it.
May 11th, 2007 at 6:28 amtracy, here’s a little hint for you, in general, it’s a very bad idea to use wikipedia as a source as the information is subjective, provided by assclowns such as youself.
May 11th, 2007 at 6:32 amyou know the biggest point boehner misses?
the pressident manufactured data in order to get even the republicans to go along with the war
WHY DO DEMOCRATS FALL DOWN ON THAT POINT?
when EVER a republican CLAIMS a democrat “voted” for the war, SOMEBODY should point out;
DO YOU THINK THEY WOULD HAVE VOTED FOR THE WAR IF THEY SAW THE EVIDENCE THE PRESIDENT WITHELD?
DO YOU THINK THEY WOULD HAVE VOTED FOR THE WAR IF THEY SAW THE BRITISH MINUTES DOCUMENTING THE PRESIDENT WAS AMNUFACTURING THE DATA TO FIT HIS POLICY?
what kind of MORONS want to claim “democrats voted for the war”?
May 11th, 2007 at 6:34 amPlease stop, just stop with this ignorant and childish rant about, “everyone voted for that war”.
“Everyone voted for a lie”, would be more honest.
May 11th, 2007 at 7:09 amAs a GOPean he probably won’t recall that he said this anyway.
May 11th, 2007 at 7:48 amThe neat part was watching the electrons dancing in the beam pentodes among the inert gases left behind by the flashing process.
Comment by WaltTheMan
Walt: It is really hard to keep track of you talking like that. :)
May 11th, 2007 at 8:14 amSo that makes it OK. Yes, if the whole world one day says that there is no gravity and after a careful research we come to the conclusion that, well, there is a force called gravity, we could say, oh, but the whole world thought there wasnt, so I look less stupid.
This is funny just like WMDs “justification” of going into Iraq…the French, the Russians…everybody thought (yeah, sure) there were WMDs, so a country is destroyed and it is OK. BTW, everybody could have thought that, but just one country broke international law.
May 11th, 2007 at 8:33 amthey voted based on bad intelligence, i.e. lies that were told to them… and some of them may have thought the president actually had a plan, and was prepared for any insurgency… it’s a different story five years later, dude…
May 11th, 2007 at 9:05 amIf the information was a “lie” it was the informatin passed down from the Clinton adminstration. Watch all the film clips of Hillary, Kerry and everyone else saying there are WMDs and we must go in . . .
ROTFL
May 11th, 2007 at 9:37 amWhat frosts me is that they DID NOT vote for Bush to invade Iraq. They voted for the use of force, if necessary, if the weapons inspectors found that Saddam had WMD’s. So, Bush pulls the weapons inspectors out of Iraq and then invades them. That is not what those people voted for.
I sure wish we had a system of government where the people of the United States could hold a “no confidence” election and throw the bum out. I’m sure that when the founding fathers gave Congress the ability to fire a president, they had no idea of what would happen to congress (becoming a wholly owned subsidiary of American corporations). If they had known that, I suspect they would have given the power to the people.
May 11th, 2007 at 9:41 am#32 & #32
Step up and debuk items in my post. If not you need not respond as weakly as you did previously.
May 11th, 2007 at 10:31 am#38
Debunk the information then. I know it take some effort on your part….but don’t let that stop you. BTW very weak…even more lame the JPark’s responses.
May 11th, 2007 at 10:35 am#33
If you would actually educate yourself by first start by actually reading my #26 post and comprehending what was stated you will find that I made it clear that Saddam wasn’t friends with the Kurds. Duh…
Here is one….
“Al-Zarqawi, a wanted terrorist for attacks against American’s and Israeli’s in 1999, and his associates Ansar al-Islam had connections to Saddam because they were actively engaged in fighting the PUK…which obviously Saddam had no problem with for obvious reasons.”
What is/was the PUK? That should help.
Oh here is another one…
“Members of Saddam’s Republican Guard have been seen in two villages run by militants from Ansar al-Islam inside Iraqi Kurdistan, an area which is otherwise controlled by anti-Saddam factions.”
Ansar al-Islam was a Sunni faction in an are controlled primarily by the Kurds.
BTW I cited Telegraph.co.uk….do you have a problem with the accuracy of the quote?
May 11th, 2007 at 11:11 amTracy,
You make good points. But while some of your premises are correct, your conclusions do no follow.
You [correctly] point out that Zarqawi was in a No-Fly-Zone area (in the northern region — essentially Kurdistan) outside Saddam’s control. The U.S., U.K., U.N, and — oh, yeah — the Kurds had more control over that area than Saddam. Yet you blame Saddam — not the U.S., U.K., U.N., or the Kurds — for not going after Zarqawi.
You [somewhat correctly] imply that, since Saddam hated the Kurds having autonomy (and, you know, trying to overthrow him and stuff) he probably didn’t care much if they were attacked — whether by Zarkawi or anyone else. (Actually, this is probably half-true; he wouldn’t care, provided it helped his regime gain/maintain power in some way.)
The cliche “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” can be useful to think about — but it only supports your statements if used very selectively. The U.S. supported Stalin, then hired ex-Nazis, supported the most vicious of dictatorships around the world (including Saddam, of course) and the Mujihideen (i.e., Al Qaeda and The Taliban), etc. etc. etc. — apparently all based on the principle that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”
That aside, two points:
1.) Saddam did NOT actively “look the other way”; in fact he had a death warrant out on Zarqawi. Why? Because Saddam was “fighting terrorism”? Of course not. Because Zarqawi (like Bin Laden) despised Saddam (the feeling was mutual) and wanted him overthrown.
2.) Remember that it was reported in that Left-Wing Rag the Wall Street Journal how we had several opportunities to kill Zarqawi BEFORE the Iraq invasion — but the Bush administration CHOSE not to, because without Zarqawi there was NO link and no case and thus he could not sell his phony little war. (I don’t believe the Journal used those exact words. :) )
The over-arching point:
Iraq was the one country in that region that had little (I would argue NO) ties to terrorism. Why was it chosen? Why not Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Jordan, Egypt…? Why not Somalia, Indonesia, Chechnya?….
Looking forward to your response.
dustin
May 11th, 2007 at 5:41 pmWhen you quote Republicans insulting Democrats butchering their own English usage by saying, “Democrat” instead of saying, “Democratic” you should insert (sic). Otherwise you are condoning and perpetuating the insult. You quote Boehner as follows, “The Senate leaders, Democrat and Repulblican,…” You should quote Boehner this way, The Senate leaders, Democrat (sic) and Republican,…”
And you should do this every time anyone uses the word Democrat when it should be Democratic.
May 11th, 2007 at 6:40 pmCanada and other democratic nations around the world opposed the invasion of Iraq by the USA. Millions of dollars out of the pockets of Canadians is being used to rebuild Afghanistan after the USA destroyed most of the civilian centers.
Although officially informed of human rights violations the USA continues to torture prisoners that have never been charged with a crime.
Canada and her allies should have taken a stand to protect the Iraqis from the illegal invasion by America. Canada as a peacekeeping force should have stationed troops in Iraq to protect the citizens from US aggression. Had this been the case, then when US troops were caught bombing schools, it would have been an act of war against Canada and her NATO allies.
Canada has an obligation to enforce the United Nations proclamations. The USA was repeatedly informed that an invasion of Iraq violated the international rules of war. Instead Canada did nothing, to her great shame, unlike the second world war when Canada took a lead in fighting the illegal invasions by the Nazis.
May 11th, 2007 at 6:42 pmIt is my hope that Canada will join Italy and other countries to enforce the arrest warrants issued for the Americans accused of war crimes.
Sen, Boehner’s statement, “I’m going to remind all of my colleagues that all of our members in this chamber, except one — all of our members in this chamber, Democrat and Republican, except one — voted to send our troops to Iraq.†Maybe he was telling the truth, maybe the only members of congress in the chamber at the moment he made this remark were the only ones who voted-except one, Pelosi?
May 11th, 2007 at 7:36 pmHmm how could someone with all the staff this guy has get it so terribly wrong I think he’s pulling what all these guys do– they say it then Fox News repeats it and boom it’s a fact.
May 11th, 2007 at 11:03 pm#51
“1.) Saddam did NOT actively “look the other wayâ€; in fact he had a death warrant out on Zarqawi.”
How do you explain that he was treated in a Baghdad hospital and laid up for some time after he was wounded in Afghanistan?
“…because without Zarqawi there was NO link and no case and thus he could not sell his phony little war.”
I don’t remember ever hearing the Bush administration ever trying to link Zarqawi to terrorist activities inside Iraq as a push to take out Saddam.
“Why was it chosen?”
Saddam was already weak militarily and Iraq provided an opportunity to change the region politically toward democracy, not to mention to get a strategic foot hold on on the western border of Iran. It’s no coincidence that Iran is BETWEEN Iraq and Afghanistan. Iran, I think has always been to main problem with their support of multiple terror groups in the region.
May 25th, 2007 at 4:06 am