It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Republicans Successfully Block Senate Debate on Iraq

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 8 2007 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Oh, the feigned outrage by the Democrats!

What really happened was that the Democrats turned down a request by the Republicans to attach an amendment to have a similar debate on support for the war.


The difference is, the majority of Americans are opposed to this war and Republicans cant seem to get that through their thick heads. The Democrats are working for the will of the people - the republicans are going against it. Didn't they learn anything in the last election??!!??




posted on Feb, 8 2007 @ 01:45 PM
link   

["Senate Republicans who earlier this week helped block deliberations on a resolution opposing President Bush's new troop deployments in Iraq changed course yesterday and vowed to use every tactic at their disposal to ensure a full and open debate.

In a letter distributed yesterday evening to Senate leaders, John W. Warner (Va.), Chuck Hagel (Neb.) and five other GOP supporters of the resolution threatened to attach their measure to any bill sent to the floor in the coming weeks. Noting that the war is the "most pressing issue of our time," the senators declared: "We will explore all of our options under the Senate procedures and practices to ensure a full and open debate."

The letter sent to Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) was not more specific about the Republican senators' strategy for reviving the war debate. But under the chamber's rules, senators have wide latitude in slowing the progress of legislation and in offering amendments, regardless of whether they have anything to do with the bill.

The letter began circulating yesterday evening after it became apparent the Senate was deadlocked over the war resolution and Reid was prepared to move on to other matters. McConnell and many in his party have aggressively defended their decision to block the bipartisan resolution as an issue of fairness because Democrats would not agree to GOP procedural demands.

But some Republicans were uneasy about appearing to have stymied the debate. The letter appeared so suddenly that, although it was addressed to Reid, the Democratic leader had not seen his copy before Warner read the text on the Senate floor."]


This was from today's Huffington Post.



posted on Feb, 8 2007 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

The Dems did not want to include the Gregg Amendment, which would have assured that funding for the troops would not be cut off. Most R's want to give the Iraq effort six more months.

[edit on 7-2-2007 by jsobecky]


Six more months to bleed and die...what the hell for?



posted on Feb, 8 2007 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo


So, same-sex marriage, abortions, stem-cell research, and every other issue should be decided if a party has a majority of +1, eh?

That's democracy my friend. If you don't like it, move abroad.

Same-sex marriage: For it.
Abortions: For it in certains circumstances.
Steam-cell research: For it.

Ah, I see. That is why same-sex marriage is now a law, eh, Vitchilo?:shk:


That's democracy, so a few can't impose their views,

No, democracy ensures that the will of the majority cannot be imposed upon the minority, Vitchilo.


Now Bush is not being democratic, so do you like his regime? I bet you don't if you have at least a sense of reality. Majority against the Iraq war, continue and increase. Majority against Iran war, he's going in by end of february. Majority against police state laws, he go forwards... It's not a democracy anymore, it's tyranny.

Vitchilo, we are not run by opinion poll or referendum here in the US. We have laws and procedures.

[edit on 8-2-2007 by jsobecky]



posted on Feb, 8 2007 @ 09:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by grover
Six more months to bleed and die...what the hell for?

So that we don't have to bleed and die for six more decades.



posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 06:45 AM
link   
Iraq would not be the mess it is now if we had not invaded. Bush can't admit it because his ego is too tied up in it.

Let me reiterate... Iraq would not be the mess it is now if we had not invaded. We made it.

Iraq may have fallen apart with the death of Saddam, but then it wouldn't be our fault, the blood would not be on our hands.

Six more months so we don't fight and die for six more decades is a bush fantasy pure and simple, rhetoric to sell the rubes.

What a piss poor thing to suffer and die for.



posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 07:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
That's democracy, so a few can't impose their views, if you destroy corruption like they do in China and illegalise lobbying aside from grassroots lobbying.

Now Bush is not being democratic, so do you like his regime? I bet you don't if you have at least a sense of reality. Majority against the Iraq war, continue and increase. Majority against Iran war, he's going in by end of february. Majority against police state laws, he go forwards... It's not a democracy anymore, it's tyranny.



Except we aren't in a democracy. America is a Republic and should be respected as such. I'm still not sure why politicians are calling it a democracy, my guess is that it started after World War II to show contrast between the the United States and the communist/tyrannical "Republics" (including the USSR), which weren't actually republics. Now that people love the term, "democracy," it stuck, and makes politicians look good when they say it.

Spreading democracy. Doing things in the name of democracy. Preserving our democracy.

It's come to take an a whole new meaning, one of political and social freedom, rather than a form of government.

[edit on 9-2-2007 by Johnmike]



posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by LogansRun

Originally posted by jsobecky
Oh, the feigned outrage by the Democrats!

What really happened was that the Democrats turned down a request by the Republicans to attach an amendment to have a similar debate on support for the war.


The difference is, the majority of Americans are opposed to this war and Republicans cant seem to get that through their thick heads. The Democrats are working for the will of the people - the republicans are going against it. Didn't they learn anything in the last election??!!??

No, that's not the difference at all. The difference is that the Democrats do not want to go on record as supporting the troops in any meaningful way such as continuing funding for them. And they don't want to be put to the vote of deciding to cut off funding.

They are cowards, and political whores. They vote by which way the wind is blowing right now.



posted on Feb, 9 2007 @ 03:16 PM
link   
Nonsense... they are already on record that cutting off funding for this stupid war isn't even on the table, though it should be. The Republicans are just trying to cover their sorry arses so that they aren't on record for anything so it won't come back and haunt them in 08 but it will. They should just get used to being the minority again, bush ain't giving an inch and it is going to hurt them BAD.

Political sluts should never complain about political whores.

[edit on 9-2-2007 by grover]



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
They vote by which way the wind is blowing right now.


as opposed to the republicans...who have been wrong over and over again...but hey, at least they've been consistently wrong, ehhh?

making a mistake is human (invading iraq under false pretenses) but you should be man enough to not only admit the mistake, but also to fix the mistake. sadly, your precious republicans have done neither.

there's nothing honorable about sticking to a position, especially when it's the wrong one.



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 04:28 PM
link   
Now be nice according to bushspeak wrong is right and losing is winning among so many other things.



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by enomus

Originally posted by jsobecky
They vote by which way the wind is blowing right now.


as opposed to the republicans...who have been wrong over and over again...but hey, at least they've been consistently wrong, ehhh?

making a mistake is human (invading iraq under false pretenses) but you should be man enough to not only admit the mistake, but also to fix the mistake. sadly, your precious republicans have done neither.

there's nothing honorable about sticking to a position, especially when it's the wrong one.


And when people are losing their lives, due to that stubborn stance on sticking to a position... people deserve more than a stirn talking too.
Making a mistake is human, but when you purposley make that decision, knowing its wrong, and presenting it as a mistake... there's no way around being directly responsible for a deliberate act that resulted in the deaths of hundereds of thousands.



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by grover
Nonsense... they are already on record that cutting off funding for this stupid war isn't even on the table, though it should be.

So then it shouldn't be a big deal if it were included in the bill, should it?


Political sluts should never complain about political whores.

[edit on 9-2-2007 by grover]

No, but that never stopped the Democrats from doing it before.



posted on Feb, 10 2007 @ 07:28 PM
link   
so which are the republicans... the sluts or the whores?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join