Sen. Snowe to co-sponsor Iraq withdrawal bill.
By on Jul 11th, 2007 at 11:15 am
Sen. Snowe to co-sponsor Iraq withdrawal bill.
According to CNN, Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME) has officially signed on as a co-sponsor to legislation withdrawing troops from Iraq by April 30, 2008. CNN’s Dana Bash reports:
Now this is significant because it makes it now just Olympia Snowe, but Sen. Gordon Smith of Oregon, two Republicans who are now going to vote with the Democrats on this. It is significant in terms of the symbolism of it, in terms of the fact it is indicative of what we have been seeing, the growing opposition to the President and to his war strategy. Prior there have been many, many votes on Iraq, many votes on the Democrats’ plans to bring troops home, but Republicans simply haven’t voted that way. … Olympia Snowe is saying she will.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Get ready, Bushco – here comes the freight train. If anyone here has never seen the wheels come off, microwave up y’all some popcorn nd get ready for the show!
July 11th, 2007 at 11:17 amThis bill needs 60 votes to make it anywhere, so every vote counts. Even if we can get 100% of the dems on board, it will still be a hard fight.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:18 amTY Olympia, I knew you were a much smarter person than you appeared to be in your continued support earlier. Wish you had come over sooner, but better late than never.
And you are giving Maine someone to be proud of now.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:18 amBetter late then never. I wish these people would of had the vision from the beginning.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:19 amWow, did that look like a wheel coming off the bus?
July 11th, 2007 at 11:21 amNow the Repugs are going to be the heroes…
July 11th, 2007 at 11:21 am…rats off a sinking ship…
July 11th, 2007 at 11:22 amAll Bush needs to do is keep delaying a few more months then he can pass his mess over to the next President and claim he didn’t “lose” in Iraq. This is what happens when idiots like Karl Rove make policy decisions when he should be keeping his attention on political matters–like getting Bush’s approval ratings to half of what Bill Clinton’s were.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:22 amOh holy s**t! Wow! Now watch every other Rethuglican that has an election in 2008 sign on. Pathetic.
“Rats leaving ship, please form a single file line on the right and wait patiently…”
July 11th, 2007 at 11:22 amA flood warning has been issued for your area……
July 11th, 2007 at 11:23 amHow many ‘R’s are ready to vote this way now?
We need 10, minimum, right? (No, we can’t count ‘Lips’ as a ‘D’.)
Where’s Collins at on this?
As Mr. Vitter did with his ‘ho’s, let’s hope for Invasion Interupptus
July 11th, 2007 at 11:23 amI’m actually surprised that Republicans aren’t leading this fight. It would mostly benefit THEM to have our troops out of there before the 2008 elections.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:24 amOn of these Repugs is going to be the tipping point and then they’ll all be jumping ship. That will be like watching a movie. The first defectors are heroes, the time to be among the heroes is running out though.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:26 amIf it takes the Republicans to be labeled “the heroes” or even to get re-elected to get us out of Iraq, so be it.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:26 amAnd when the chymp vetoes it, will she be on board for impeachment?
July 11th, 2007 at 11:29 amThat’s the real question here.
Get real guys. Snowe is just kicking the political can down the road, until election season; then repubs will “stand up” to the president, because they see the writing on the electoral wall. If they bring’em home in ‘08, it’s because they don’t want to be defeated. The first week after the election in ‘08 will see a repubs getting amnesia, and again smearing the dems as defeatist appeasers, convieniently forgetting that it was they that finally folded, to appease thier constituents.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:29 amChris, it actually wouldn’t take 60 votes to do something.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:30 amI’ve thought that allowing a fillibuster might just be a good thing at this point.
Let the republics stall the Senate out by fillibustering their asses off for a couple of months. Let em. Dare em. They’ll cave as their continued employment becomes more and more less certain.
i like.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:31 amSnowe has been one of the few Republicans I mentally categorize as “Not completely nuts.”
It’s upsetting it took her this long to get here, but at least she’s here, now.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:32 amInto the fifth year of this failed venture called Iraq and now with their own political future on the line, Republicans are slowly switching positions. Heroes my ass. These people are cowards and should be voted out of office whether or not they favor troop withdrawal. The Republican party can rot in hell for all I care. They can take Leibermann along too.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:32 amRepublican senators with terms ending in 2008:
Alexander (R-TN)
July 11th, 2007 at 11:33 amAllard (R-CO)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Craig (R-ID)
Dole (R-NC)
Dominici (R-NM)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Hagel (R-NE)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Roberts (R-KS)
Warner (R-VA)
Smith (R-OR)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Here’s the political calculus for those GOP senators up for re-election in ‘08 who still aren’t sure if they should split away from Bush just yet:
Odds of winning in ‘08 are inversely proportional to the voters’ ability to remember that you backed Bush on the war, and they diminish with time. In other words, the sooner you get on board with the timeline for withdrawal, the less likely you are to get kicked out of the Senate in November ‘08. Dawdle at your own peril.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:36 amI will not hold my breath about this, but I hope it succeeds.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:36 amchimpeach ~ astutely posited.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:37 amWhy Senators Snowe and Gordon speaking now?!! Because their seats in the Senate are not assured in next 2008 elections.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:38 amThey need this push if they have any chance of winning back their seats….
What will they do after winning another 6 years?!
Shall the voters believe them?!!
Why Senators Snowe and Gordon speaking now?!! Because their seats in the Senate are not assured in next 2008 elections.
They need this push if they have any chance of winning back their seats….
What will they do after winning another 6 years?!
Shall the voters believe them?!!
Comment by tarazan — July 11, 2007 @ 11:38 am
I believe the voters should believe them as much as they believe lying Nancy Pelosy and Harry Reid who have a Congress that has done NOTHING since the Democrats became the majority.
If you think Republicans are the only ones in trouble, you are quite the ignorant person.
Voters are angry at BOTH parties, they are angry at Bush and angry at the Congress.
2008 elections should be quite interesting.
The left is only talking about RINOs, but I can guarantee you that there are Blue Dog Democrats that will jump over to the Republican side and vote against any bill that calls for a withdrawl from Iraq.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:45 amDream on conservasnort. In Nov 08 there will be a landslide like no other in American political history.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:47 amThe rest of the Neocon, fascista in the Senate and House will be swept into the dustbin of history.
Is it time to start using the term “flip-flop” again?
Or has that been co-opted by the Neocons?
July 11th, 2007 at 11:54 amTo Conservatron –
You’re right that Democratic voters are as frustrated with the Dems in congress as with the Repubs. But don’t think for a minute that we are going to vote them out. Dems will just elect more of them so we have a real functioning majority in congress, not just a numerical one.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:54 am“I believe the voters should believe them as much as they believe lying Nancy Pelosy and Harry Reid who have a Congress that has done NOTHING since the Democrats became the majority.”
LOL… Dear heart, has it ever occurred to you to wonder just why nothing has been passed? Hint: the party that has stalled all legislation does not have a “D” in its name.
“If you think Republicans are the only ones in trouble, you are quite the ignorant person.”
Unless, of course, you look at the polls that break down Congressional approval ratings along party lines, in which case you find that Congressional Democrats are significantly more popular than Congressional Republicans.
“Voters are angry at BOTH parties, they are angry at Bush and angry at the Congress.”
Dear heart, they’re angry at Congress for not doing enough to challenge Bush. That’s changing now but even if it didn’t, that voter attitude does not bode well for Republicans.
“2008 elections should be quite interesting.”
Yup. The Republican Party is in serious trouble.
“The left is only talking about RINOs, but I can guarantee you that there are Blue Dog Democrats that will jump over to the Republican side and vote against any bill that calls for a withdrawl from Iraq.”
Sorry, but Lieberman isn’t a Democrat any more. And fewer and fewer of the House Democrats will take that approach. They can read the writing on the wall, too.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:55 amDream on conservasnort. In Nov 08 there will be a landslide like no other in American political history.
The rest of the Neocon, fascista in the Senate and House will be swept into the dustbin of history.
Comment by RUCerious — July 11, 2007 @ 11:47 am
Well my friend, it is you the one that needs to dream on. Let us not forget that with a very unpopular war going on, Nixon won a second term. Back then, idiots like you also claimed that there was no way that with such an unpopular war he could win a second term.
Not much of a historian or an educated person, are you RUCerious? don’t worry, most Libtards like you aren’t.
There won’t be a landslide I can guarantee you that.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:55 amSnowe isn’t actually up for re-election until 2012 (she was re-elected last November). So this may be more than her just saving her own kiester.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:57 amIs this our Dana Bash bukkake moment?
July 11th, 2007 at 11:59 amModeration, with a SLIGHT majority and the GOP stonewalling at every point, what do you expect the dems to do? They can’t get a single piece of legislation veto proofed with the rethugs blocking everything. Impeachment would be meaningless without votes. The GOP has sunk to the lowest of lows by blocking EVERYTHING the dems do, simply because the dems are doing it.
These elected officials care only about winning or losing. There is no care or concern about our country. Bush must have something on all those who continue to support him (do you think the American people are the only ones being wiretapped?), because there’s no other reason.
The rats that are leaving that ship are up for reelection. I hope that Dominici ’s state remembers the USA scandal (who knows how that’s going to come to pass), Inhofe’s moronic statement about a political statement in global warming (love how the GOP makes it a political thing – but everything for them is political – and f*ck the country and the world). If the people of those states don’t wise up and elect someone on something other than family values (right Vitter?) this country is going to continue to sink – and then we’re all going to be those rats…with few places to go.
July 11th, 2007 at 11:59 amThere won’t be a landslide I can guarantee you that.
Comment by conservatron
And the day after the election in Nov 2008, you will be absent, off crying in your beer, like most all of the other trolls that made predictions for nov 2006.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:00 pmWhat’s happening to Dana Bash below the camera range? I’ve seen that face before, but it involved noodly appendages.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:01 pmWe are now witnessing the beginning of the proverbial “when hell freezes over”.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:02 pmTo Conservatron –
Nixon didn’t start the war in Vietnam. His war can’t really be compared with Bush’s.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:03 pmTo Conservatron –
Nixon didn’t start the war in Vietnam. His war can’t really be compared with Bush’s.
Comment by missmolly — July 11, 2007 @ 12:03 pm
Oh this is classic!!! Libtards, since 2003, have been comparing Iraq to Vietnam. Now that it is incovinient for a Libtard to use this comparison, he cries about it.
oh this is classice.
poor mental midgets and dishonest Libtards.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:07 pmTron, it’s nice to see your reality isn’t tainted with any of the real reality.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:08 pm#27
That would actually require people in the red states to vote for the Dems. Not going to happen. Besides we all know Hillary will get the Dem nomination. When that happens and the true presidential campaign starts you will see opposition to her that will make the Iraq war opposition look like a tea party.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:08 pmComment by missmolly
Molly you are step ahead of me, I was going to post a question for this listing.
this list gives you an idea who will do what, though it apllies to Dems too.
thanks
July 11th, 2007 at 12:09 pm“Yes, let us blame the Republicans for the Democratic party doing shit since they took power.”
ROFL… The truth hurts, doesn’t it, dear? The facts are available, dear. In the House, where Republicans have fewer options, all of the promised legislation, and then some, has passed. In the Senate, all of the legislation has been introduced and all of it has been blocked by Republican maneuvering. In fact, a couple of them are quite proud of their obstructionism, openly taking credit for blocking everything.
“Typical piece of garbage Libtard that needs to blame everyone else for his failures.”
LOL… My failures, dear? I didn’t realize that I was a Senator. Thanks ever so for the promotion.
“Piece of human feces, take responsability for your actions.”
I do, dear, always.
“The Democratic Party is in the leadership position in Congress, if they were real politicians and good at what they did, they would know how to handle the Republican minority to get things done.”
That’s the inconvenient thing about a democracy and about Senate rules, dear. When you play by those rules, you don’t get to be a dictator. I know that’s difficult for a Republican partisan to understand, since they excel at playing fast and loose with those rules, but that’s the way things work.
“Typical Libtard always the victim and always unwilling to take responsability for their actions.”
ROFL… Whatever you say, dear.
“don’t you get tired of your bull sht, Clinton’s feces?”
Since I have to yet to utter any “bull sht” [sic], dear, I’m afraid the answer is “no.” Thanks ever so for asking, though. Your concern for me is really touching.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:09 pmStatistics courtesy of OliverWillis.com:
Some facts:
* Senate Republicans have obstructed almost every bill in the Senate – even ones with wide bipartisan support.
* So far, in the first half of the first session of the 110th Congress, there have been THIRTEEN cloture votes on motions to proceed – each one wasting days of Senate time. (110th Congress, Roll Call Votes #44, 51, 53, 74, 129, 132, 133, 162, 173, 207, 208, 227, and 228)
* In comparison, in the first sessions of the 108th and 109th Congresses combined, there were a total of FOUR cloture votes on motions to proceed.
EIGHT times Republican obstruction tactics slowed critical legislation
* Fulfilling the 9/11 Commission Recommendations (Passed 97-0, Roll Call Vote #53)
* Improving security at our courts ( Passed 93-3, Roll Call Vote #133)
* Water Resources Development Act (Passed 89-7, Roll Call Vote #162)
* A joint resolution to revise U.S. policy in Iraq (Passed 89-9, Roll Call Vote, #74)
* Comprehensive Immigration Reform (Passed 69-23, Roll Call Vote #173)
* Comprehensive Immigration Reform (Passed 64-35, Roll Call Vote #228)
* CLEAN Energy Act ( Passed 91-0, Roll Call Vote #208)
* Funding for the Intelligence Community (Passed 94-3, Roll Call Vote #129)
FOUR times Republicans blocked legislation from being debated
* Senate Republicans blocked raising the minimum wage. (54-43, Roll Call Vote #23)
* Senate Republicans blocked ethics reforms (Rejected 51-46, Roll Call Vote #16)
* Senate Republicans blocked comprehensive immigration reform (Rejected 45-50, Roll Call Vote #206)
* Senate Republicans blocked funding for renewable energy (Rejected 57-36, Roll Call Vote #223)
FOUR times Republicans stopped bills from reaching a vote
* Senate Republicans blocked funding for the intelligence community. ( Rejected 41-40, Roll Call Vote #130)
* Senate Republicans blocked raising the minimum wage. (54-43, Roll Call Vote #23)
* Senate Republicans blocked ethics reforms (Rejected 51-46, Roll Call Vote #16)
* Senate Republicans blocked funding for renewable energy (Rejected 57-36, Roll Call Vote #223)
TWICE Republicans blocked bills from going to conference
* Senate Republicans blocked appointing conferees on the 9/11 Commission Recommendations (6/26/07)
July 11th, 2007 at 12:13 pm* Senate Republicans blocked appointing conferees on ethics reform ( 6/26/07)
From a “Roll Call” article, April 18, 2007, quoting Trent Lott: “The strategy of being obstructionist can work or fail … so far it’s working for us.â€
July 11th, 2007 at 12:15 pmPaulB,
I don’t think you want to play this game, want me to show you all the things that Democrats blocked while Republicans were the majority.
What you are essentially saying is that whether it is a Republican controlled Congress, or a Democratic controlled Congress, it is the minority party’s fault when Congress doesn’t get anything done.
IN other words, you are saying that the do nothing Congress of last year did nothing thanks to the Democrats.
poor you, always needing to blame someone else for your party’s failures.
you have been brainwashed through and through, Democratic party puppet.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:17 pmFrom a “Roll Call†article, April 18, 2007, quoting Trent Lott: “The strategy of being obstructionist can work or fail … so far it’s working for us.â€
Comment by PaulB — July 11, 2007 @ 12:15 pm
Once again, are you saying that the failures of a Congress fall on the minority party? yes or now will suffice, Clinton’s feces.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:18 pm“Oh, poor Imbecile. At least you admit your party is a failure in Congress and that you are Clinton’s feces.”
No, dear, I don’t, thanks ever so. I see that you still haven’t learned to comprehend what you read.
“Now if you would man enough to admit that the Democratic failure is theirs alone.”
ROFL… No, dear, it isn’t, a fact which will not be lost on the voters in 2008, which is why your predictions about 2008 are, well, worthless.
“Ahhh, but we all know, Libtards always love playing the victims and always love blaming others for their failures.”
No, dear, we just like telling the truth. I’m so sorry that bothers you so much.
“As always, once you have met a Liberal, you have met them all. You are carbon copies of each other.”
ROFL… Whatever you say, dear.
“Sorry kid, you have ZERO clue to what you are talking about, typical Libtard.”
ROFL… So let’s see; I’ve actually posted data to support my position. You have posted … well, the phrase “mindless partisan drivel” comes to mind. Let’s let the judges decide, shall we?
“Nothing has changed from yesterday.”
LOL… Hey, we actually agree on something!
“but nice to see that you have zero self-control and you need to respond to my every post.”
ROFL… Whatever you say, dear.
“keep it coming, you amuse me my little one.”
ROFL… Whatever you say, dear.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:18 pm“Once again, are you saying that the failures of a Congress fall on the minority party?”
In this case? Yes, dear, and a couple of the member of that party are quite proud of their ability to use the rules to obstruct passage of bills, even bills with broad bipartisan support. So much for that “up or down vote” rhetoric.
Unfortunately for that minority party, though, they are accumulating quite a bill, and that bill will come due in 2008. I expect quite a few changes in the coming year as we get closer and closer to that election.
By the way, dear, have you actually looked at the polls that broke down support of Congress along party lines?
July 11th, 2007 at 12:21 pmHey, Conservatron. You’re urgently needed over on the Webb amendment thread.
C’mon…chop-chop.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:23 pm“Oh, poor Imbecile. At least you admit your party is a failure in Congress and that you are Clinton’s feces.â€
No, dear, I don’t, thanks ever so. I see that you still haven’t learned to comprehend what you read.
“Now if you would man enough to admit that the Democratic failure is theirs alone.â€
ROFL… No, dear, it isn’t, a fact which will not be lost on the voters in 2008, which is why your predictions about 2008 are, well, worthless.
“Ahhh, but we all know, Libtards always love playing the victims and always love blaming others for their failures.â€
No, dear, we just like telling the truth. I’m so sorry that bothers you so much.
“As always, once you have met a Liberal, you have met them all. You are carbon copies of each other.â€
ROFL… Whatever you say, dear.
“Sorry kid, you have ZERO clue to what you are talking about, typical Libtard.â€
ROFL… So let’s see; I’ve actually posted data to support my position. You have posted … well, the phrase “mindless partisan drivel†comes to mind. Let’s let the judges decide, shall we?
“Nothing has changed from yesterday.â€
LOL… Hey, we actually agree on something!
“but nice to see that you have zero self-control and you need to respond to my every post.â€
ROFL… Whatever you say, dear.
“keep it coming, you amuse me my little one.â€
ROFL… Whatever you say, dear.
Comment by PaulB — July 11, 2007 @ 12:18 pm
Posted data to support your position? you posted a one sided story, you posted what is called half-truths.
Now, do you care to post up all the bills that the Democratic Senators blocked while the Republicans were the majority? I am sure you are terrified that you will be shown as the buffoon that you are.
you are quite the mental midget and the intellectually dishonest. But what can we expect, you are but a sad Libtard.
just keep it coming, as always, you are amusing.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:23 pmwhen you know you will lose your next election, you do anything to make it look like you were always for against being for or against the war.
human garbage of the worst kind. they don’t give a damn about anything but themselves. I sure hope they are found to be involved in other republican crimes so that they can be incarcerated.
Isn’t it time we start making changes to the constitution to protect ourselves from this kind of terrorist?
July 11th, 2007 at 12:23 pm“I don’t think you want to play this game, want me to show you all the things that Democrats blocked while Republicans were the majority.”
ROFL… Feel free, dear, since it will totally undercut your point that the majority party is totally and completely responsible for the failure to pass legislation. By all means, play my game, dear; I welcome it.
By the way, dear heart, you might want to actually take a look at what was actually blocked by the minority party. Free clue: what the Republicans are blocking this year has wide popularity among the voters.
“What you are essentially saying is that whether it is a Republican controlled Congress, or a Democratic controlled Congress, it is the minority party’s fault when Congress doesn’t get anything done.”
No, dear, I’m not. I’m talking quite specifically about this Congress and, even more specifically, this Senate. And I’m tying that back into what will happen in the 2008 elections. Do try to keep up, dear. Shall I post some Cliff’s Notes for you?
“IN other words, you are saying that the do nothing Congress of last year did nothing thanks to the Democrats.”
See my free clue above, dear.
“poor you, always needing to blame someone else for your party’s failures.”
ROFL… So tell me, dear, who was responsible for last year’s failures?
“you have been brainwashed through and through, Democratic party puppet.”
ROFL… Whatever you say, dear.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:26 pmconservatron is aptly named: basically a programmed right wing robot who simply regurgitates what the Great Right Wing Lying Wurlitzer pumps out day after day; I particularly love it when they attack liberal “stupidity” with rants that are rife misspelling and poor grammar; it’s a basic feature, not a bug, of the right wing lizard brain.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:27 pm“Posted data to support your position?”
Why yes, dear, I did. Did you have a point to make?
“you posted a one sided story, you posted what is called half-truths.”
ROFL… Dear heart, if you dispute the data, then by all means post your own or point out where the data is false. Regrettably for you, the record is quite clear, and it’s not even being disputed by Congressional Republicans. See, for example, the Trent Lott quote I cited above.
“Now, do you care to post up all the bills that the Democratic Senators blocked while the Republicans were the majority?”
Why should I, dear? Let’s go through the numbers, shall we?
1. You are the one who claimed that sole responsibility for failure to pass legislation rests with the party in power. If you decide to argue that Democrats successfully blocked Republican legislation over the past few years, you will be completely undercutting that claim. Bring it on, dear.
2. The legislation that Democrats blocked was, for the most part, not particularly popular, which is why voters did not hold them accountable in 2006.
3. We’re talking about the 2008 elections, dear, remember? I don’t think that the voters are going to be too impressed by arguments that “the Democrats did it, too!” from Republicans regarding their obstructionism.
“I am sure you are terrified that you will be shown as the buffoon that you are.”
ROFL… Bring it on, dear.
“you are quite the mental midget and the intellectually dishonest. But what can we expect, you are but a sad Libtard.”
ROFL… Whatever you say, dear.
“just keep it coming, as always, you are amusing.”
Whatever you say, dear.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:32 pmconservatron is aptly named: basically a programmed right wing robot who simply regurgitates what the Great Right Wing Lying Wurlitzer pumps out day after day; I particularly love it when they attack liberal “stupidity†with rants that are rife misspelling and poor grammar; it’s a basic feature, not a bug, of the right wing lizard brain.
Comment by digitusmedius — July 11, 2007 @ 12:27 pm
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! oh you win them all.
1) I don’t care much about grammar or spelling on a site full of inpet, poorly educated fools. I want you guys to understand what I am saying, thus I type on a level that equates Libtard education.
2)Looked in the mirror lately? Everything that PaulB, you, and the rest of the Libtards on here are saying are the daily talking points of your party, candidates, Libtard pundits, etc..
You turn on Air America and you hear the same talking points being said here on TP, spoken by a Liberal, being spewed out by Obama, Hillary, Edwards, etc.
Stop projecting son, your party and voters walk in lock-step. I know you are too stupid to realize this.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:32 pm“Oh, in this case yes….”
So you’re conceding my point, dear? Thanks ever so. You could have saved yourself a lot of embarrassment by doing so up front instead of continuing to deny reality.
“but how about all the bills that the Democratic party blocked when they were the minority and didn’t allow Republicans to pass bills.”
Dear heart, if you can show that the votes on those bills will have any impact on the 2008 elections and on Republican votes between now and then, which is, after all, the topic of this thread, then by all means do so. I can’t wait to see what you come up with.
“I get it, Clinton’s Feces, if Democratic majority in Congress does nothing, it is the Republicans faults, but if a Republican majority in Congress does nothing, it is the Republicans fault.”
Dear heart, since I said nothing of the kind, forgive me if I don’t take this strawman argument any more seriously than I do your other arguments.
“You do know that you are one huge Democratic partisan hack, right?”
ROFL… Oh, the irony…
“it is hillarious how stupid you are. keep it coming you are amusing me my Pauly.”
ROFL… Whatever you say, dear.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:34 pmGo Olympia! And Go Gordon, if he really goes through with it. I’ll not hold my breath on that one.
I am glad to see the Republics actually co-sponsor the bill rather than just saying they will go along with it.
The clock is ticking. The time is running out for the Bush Crime Family!
July 11th, 2007 at 12:37 pm“1) So you are saying that when Republicans didn’t get anything done it could have been because Democrats blocked their ability to do it?”
Could have been? Certainly, dear. Why should I deny the obvious, dear?
“Democrats being a minority, obstructionist party….wow, how could they, they care about the people, right? how dare they play political games in the Senate and the House.”
ROFL… Dear heart, do you really not see just how silly this argument is?
“2)Widely popular bills? once again, in your mind. All the voices in your head do not equate to America’s majority. I know they are quite a few, kid, but c’mon now.”
Dear heart, I’m using opinion poll data; what are you using? Yes, dear, such things as raising the minimum wage, implementing the security provisions of the 9/11 Commission, increasing funding for clean/renewable energy, developing and improving water resources, ethics reform, and so on are widely popular.
“try to stop talking out of your behind kid you are stinking up the place.”
ROFL… Whatever you say, dear.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:39 pm“Stop projecting son, your party and voters walk in lock-step. I know you are too stupid to realize this.”
ROFL… Oh, the irony…
July 11th, 2007 at 12:39 pmNeocons hate that liberals are educated. That’s why their base tends to be of the ilk who graduate from Regents (wonder how valuable those degrees are these days!) That’s why education costs are skyrocketing; they love the ignorant masses that follow them like lemmings over a precipice (look it up, conservatron…you might learn something).
Dumb, fat and happy. That’s who the GOP talking heads talk to. The typical Fox viewer who can’t think beyond what’s spoon-fed to them. The Limbomorons who love to hate (it’s a lot easier to hate when you are uninformed or ill informed),
I love when these idiot neocons come here and espouse the level of crap they are only regurgitating from some talking head who makes 100x what they do, whose job security is a lot more stable than their viewers, who have enough money to pay for all the healthcare they could ever want or need. A bunch of f*cking idiots who are selling their own interests by buying into a talking head.
Brilliant strategy! Simply brilliant!
July 11th, 2007 at 12:40 pm“Republican senators with terms ending in 2008:”
Wow, Olympia Snow isn’t even up for re-election in 2008. More than good on her. This shows a tremendous amount of courage by her. She has just cooked her own goose with the Lemming Republic party. Maybe she will become the Democrats Joe Lieberman.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:42 pmConservatron, you’re still urgently needed on the Webb amendment thread!
Also, Daryll could really use some help on the “President Bush makes little girls cry” thread.
Get the lead out!
July 11th, 2007 at 12:43 pmSince there is a real chance for serious discussion in this thread and since I actually have a life, I’ll stop trolling our dear little chum and move on. For the record, I think this is the tip of the iceberg. The closer we get to 2008, the more Senate Republicans you’re going to find looking at their poll numbers and not liking what they see. I don’t expect much to change in the Iraq discussion that’s taking place now, and maybe not even in September, but next year, I think you’re going to see that logjam breaking loose on Iraq and on other key issues. They simply cannot afford not to if they want to hold their seats in the 2008 election.
Keep in mind, too, that the 2008 election strongly favors the Democratic Party in the Senate, since more Republican Senators than Democratic need to hold their seats, and more of them are more vulnerable, with badly sagging approval ratings and poll numbers, than their Democratic counterparts. The Republican Party isn’t stupid and neither are those Senators. Bush will be a lame duck, an anchor on the party that the Democrats will be happy to exploit. They’re going to have to abandon him to survive.
The 25 percenters, like our dear little chum, are never going to abandon Bush but you can’t win an election with 25%.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:46 pmLooks like the Republicans just didn’t want the Democrats to get any credit. Why else propose the same exact bill they opposed when Democrats sponsored it a month ago? Oh well, anything that will end our involvement in Iraq is fine with me, even if they took too long and played politics on the bill.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:50 pmOk folks, conservatron is the new troll for us to ignore. I still think that if we ignore them, they will go away. All they are doing right now is changing identities like they change their underwear and every time they do that, they suck in another one of us to get into a pissing match with them.
PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!
July 11th, 2007 at 12:51 pmTo conservatron –
You have a point in that I should have phrased my post better. I should have said that Nixon couldn’t really be compared to Bush on the war issue, since Nixon didn’t start the Vietnam conflict. The comparison was between Nixon and Bush — not the two wars themselves (there are still PLENTY of valid comparisons there).
A fairer comparison would be between LBJ and Bush, as LBJ really DID escalate the war into an unwinnable quagmire similar to the mess in Iraq today.
And you’ll remember that LBJ was so unpopular because of Vietnam (despite all he had done for civil rights on the home front) that he couldn’t even win the New Hampshire primary for re-election in 1968, prompting him to drop out of the race.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:51 pmTo #73 Floridian:
You’re right that the primary objective for Republicans is to prevent Democrats from accomplishing anything. If Dems wanted to pass a resolution praising motherhood, you can bet the Reps would filibuster against it.
Look at the Webb Amendment — who in their right mind would deny a soldier a well-earned rest? But because it was the Dems who introduced it, the Reps voted against it. Sigh.
July 11th, 2007 at 12:55 pmMissMolly,
I agree 100%. I also noticed that when the Democrats were in the minority, even the thought that they might fillibuster a bill was shouted down by the mainstream media. The media told us those evil obstructing Democrats were thwarting the will of the people. Those same media figures are strangely silent about all the Republican obstructionism though. Suddenly, fillibustering or refusing an up or down vote are perfectly acceptable actions for the minority party, to the point that the media won’t even discuss them. Not a single Republican is being criticized for “not supporting the troops” even when they refuse to give them a reasonable break between tours in Iraq.
July 11th, 2007 at 1:02 pmLook at the Webb Amendment — who in their right mind would deny a soldier a well-earned rest? But because it was the Dems who introduced it, the Reps voted against it. Sigh.
Comment by missmolly — July 11, 2007 @ 12:55 pm
Missmolly,
Oh please, I guess you forgot that since 2003 the Democratic party had been calling for a surge in Iraq, for more troops in Iraq. The second that Bush agreed and said, yes we need more troops, let me send them……guess what happened?! The Democratic party now said that we didn’t need more troops in Iraq.
Webb’s amendment is political and stupid. It is designed to undercut the military. Anyone with an IQ over 80 would know this.
July 11th, 2007 at 1:33 pm“Oh please, I guess you forgot that since 2003 the Democratic party had been calling for a surge in Iraq, for more troops in Iraq.”
Link, please?
July 11th, 2007 at 1:37 pmconservatron displays another feature, not a bug, of the right wing lizard brain: nothing, but nothing, derails it from its compulsion to keep making an idiot of itself; not pointing out its illiteracy, it’s ignorance of, well everything, or it’s extreme immaturity
July 11th, 2007 at 1:43 pmI am Mega-Conservatron! I make points like Conservatron, only pithier!
I begin by saying the word “libtard” repeatedly. This is a powerful debate tactic, because it combines the prefix lib- with the suffix -tard! Thus, I show my disdain for things liberal, and imply quite strongly that such things are stupid.
I continue by responding to your posts with disagreement. If you claim something to be true, I will immediately deny that thing’s truthfulness! It’s like jujitsu, but with words! I have no need for facts and research, for I am fully equipped with false analogies and the word “libtard”. Plus, I have no spell-checking equipment (internal or otherwise) to slow me down.
None can defeat Mega-Conservatron! Especially not sad, sad Clinton-doody-poop-faces. (Dare I coin a synonym for “libtard”? I do dare!)
July 11th, 2007 at 1:46 pmNo it isn’t.
It seems that TP is determined to clearly separate the parties, another anti-American tactic. However, Snowe’s political affiliation is of no importance.
Both the Republicans and the Democrats have their Surrender Monkeys and their Patriots.
July 11th, 2007 at 2:01 pm“Link, please?”
If I recall correctly, some Democrats did, in fact, call for more troops in 2003, back when it would have made a difference to have those extra troops. Circumstances have changed since then, of course, and the few extra troops that we have been able to commit in “the surge” are pretty clearly insufficient. The general public and Congressional Democrats are aware of this. Congressional Republicans may have to wait until 2008 to truly learn this lesson.
July 11th, 2007 at 3:16 pm“No it isn’t.”
LOL… Oh, gee, I guess that settles it. Oh, wait, no it doesn’t. The first chink in the armor, dear heart, is always significant. You can expect to see more in the months ahead; deal with it.
“It seems that TP is determined to clearly separate the parties, another anti-American tactic.”
ROFL… Oh my … you do realize that this makes no sense at all, right? You don’t? Oh, dear. I’m so sorry.
“However, Snowe’s political affiliation is of no importance.”
Yes, dear, it is, particularly when Congressional Republicans have been presenting a nearly unanimous front on the war in Iraq.
“Both the Republicans and the Democrats have their Surrender Monkeys and their Patriots.”
ROFL… No comment necessary.
July 11th, 2007 at 3:19 pmWhy is it that Republicans are hailed for doing something “significant in terms of the symbolism of it” but if Democrats do anything that appears symbolic rather than definitive because they don’t have Republican votes to pass it they’re wasting their time with measures that mean nothing?
Although that’s typical for Dana Bash.
July 11th, 2007 at 4:01 pmsqueak, squeak, splash!
July 11th, 2007 at 4:08 pmSenator Snowe is not running in 2008, she has almost a full term ahead of her. There is at least a good possibility that she will not run again. Her current stand is almost surely a vote of conscience. She should be congratulated for this even as she is urged to change her stands on so many other issues.
July 11th, 2007 at 4:32 pmSo she’s a co-sponsor. Good pub; and who will notice when she doesn’t vote for cloture.
July 11th, 2007 at 4:47 pmThis is a step in the right direction. We need more republicans to join democrats in bringing our troops home. We need to send a message to Bush and Cheney that Bush can veto as many bills he likes Congress will keep sending them to him so he can go on the record with the American people who stand with the democrats on the issue of bringing our troops home. Bush should not be able to waive either the date of withdrawal or the benchmarks that the Iraqis must meet.
July 11th, 2007 at 7:30 pmTypical Libtard always the victim and always unwilling to take responsability(SIC) for their actions.
don’t you get tired of your bull sht(SIC), Clinton’s feces?
Libtards, since 2003, have been comparing Iraq to Vietnam. Now that it is incovinient(SIC) for a Libtard to use this comparison, he cries about it.
oh this is classice(SIC)
Comment by conservatron — July 11, 2007 @ 11:58 am
I just love how conservatard/howsad/valiantthehater, etc. calls liberals/progressives stupid, etc., all the while making spelling errors galore, having no sense of punctuation, etc.
July 11th, 2007 at 8:03 pmDon’t you ever get tired of your own BS and hypocrisy, conservatard? Oh, that’s right; you’re a paid troll. Typical of Republiscums that they can’t even find someone literate to do it.
Moderation, with a SLIGHT majority and the GOP stonewalling at every point, what do you expect the dems to do?
Comment by MsJoanne — July 11, 2007 @ 11:59 am
Methinks this was in fact directed at someone else. I know damned well that the Republicans are obstructing, per Mitch McConnell’s own words, EVERYTHING the Democrats wish to present to Congress, on so-called “principle”.
I’m of the opinion that the Democrats should be attacking all of this through appropriations. Defund the White House (all of it), defund the military for anything not related to redeploying from Iraq, defund every, single, solitary damned private contractor, especially the mercenaries such as Blackwater. This is the one means Congress has, outside of its oversight powers, to bring this mess into check. Oversight by the various committees is a far slower process. If defunding were the tool of choice, the Executive couldn’t do a damned thing about it, besides try to play politics and exert that form of pressure. However, if the Congress keeps passing quite significant funding bills with the aforementioned stipulations, and placing them before the President, his vetoes and the nay votes from the opposition, will be the true reason why the troops are not being funded.
Read the Constitution. Congress gets to set up how the military is organized, the rules the military follows, the theatres of war the military is allowed to fight in, the rules under which the military must operate in that theatre of war, and the funding the military gets. The President gets to decide the raw strategic and tactical decisions, provided they follow the rules Congress allowed for that particular military action!
Section 8: The Congress shall have power
…
To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;
To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;
To provide and maintain a navy;
To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
…
Section 2:
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;
Those are the authorities the two branches have in terms of control of the military. Read them. Study them. Memorize them. Love them.
July 11th, 2007 at 9:24 pmTo #75 missmolly
July 12th, 2007 at 4:56 amYour comparison of the domestic impacts of the present Bush Administration’s Iraq policy with LBJ’s Vietnam policy is intriguing.
Although you are correct in stating that Vietnam policy weakened LBJ’s position within the Democratic Party, he did in fact “win” the Democratic primary in New Hampshire in 1968. What was so devastating about the election was its margin of victory. Johnson, the sitting President with all the trappings of office was unable to secure a resounding victory over an upstart fellow Democrat who wasn’t supported by party machinery in the nation’s first test of electorial strength. This glimpse of weakness immediately opened the door to other serious and well-financed challengers within his own party.
Today the reverse seems to be true. Challengers to Bush policy come from the opposition party while stalwarts within the Republican party continue to defend the Iraq occupation and insist on widening the war (with the notable exception of Rep. Ron Paul).