Democrats failing to pass anti-war bill

Damocles said:
Yes, it is a joke. But the sting is there because it has a hint of truth.

No matter how you try to spin it, that was a vote to continue the war.
Click to expand...

And how many times Have I been called a negative glass is half empty type....

Or could this be a touch of Bush Apologism coming out ?
 
Cypress said:
I have no clue what you're talking about. Is this a slam on my arithmetic, Mr. Math whiz? ;)

I said 15 republicans plus the fifty democrats would make it veto proof. Which is two off of 67, so are you quibbling about my math being off by two senators?


:confused:
Click to expand...
No, I am saying that a vote of 70 makes it veto-proof. Too bad the vote didn't go your way.... It seems that they only do veto-proof measures as they vote for continued funding for the war....

:/

Seriously, this is a sad day to watch people who say that they want the war ended now promoting a 70 to 28 vote to continue the funding as an "anti-war" vote.
 
uscitizen said:
And how many times Have I been called a negative glass is half empty type....

Or could this be a touch of Bush Apologism coming out ?
Click to expand...
What are you talking about? You can't even think without typing Bush...

What of my comments says that I support this war and am happy that my party supports it?
 
Onceler said:
"The one vote to end the war was 70 to 28 against. That means that ONLY 28 VOTED FOR IT. Many of the Ds voted against defunding the war. That is where the spin is."

I don't want my reps defunding the war. That's not the way to end it.
Click to expand...

True, that is not the way to end the war. But neither is pulling an arbitrary date out of someones ass and saying "this is the date the troops must be out by"
 
Damocles said:
No, I am saying that a vote of 70 makes it veto-proof. Too bad the vote didn't go your way.... It seems that they only do veto-proof measures as they vote for continued funding for the war....

:/

Seriously, this is a sad day to watch people who say that they want the war ended now promoting a 70 to 28 vote to continue the funding as an "anti-war" vote.
Click to expand...


As far as I can tell, no one is saying that but you.
 
Damocles said:
No, I am saying that a vote of 70 makes it veto-proof. Too bad the vote didn't go your way.... It seems that they only do veto-proof measures as they vote for continued funding for the war....

:/

Seriously, this is a sad day to watch people who say that they want the war ended now promoting a 70 to 28 vote to continue the funding as an "anti-war" vote.
Click to expand...


1) I wish more than 28 democrats would vote to defund the war.

2) I don't have a doubt in my mind, that bush will leave underequipped and underfunded troops to die in iraq, and then run TV ads claiming the democrats made the troops run out of bullets in combat.
 
Darla said:
You are reading that as 56 voted against it. But 56 voted for it.
They needed 60 to reach cloture.

The bill was fillibustered.

You didn't hear the bill was fillibustered, because the liberal media only reports when democrats fillibuster. Even on CE Be Sbullshit, right Damo? No fillibuster, thus confusing libertarians with the math.
Click to expand...


Oh okay, my bad.
 
Cypress said:
1) I wish more than 28 democrats would vote to defund the war.

2) I don't have a doubt in my mind, that bush will leave underequipped and underfunded troops to die in iraq, and then run TV ads claiming the democrats made the troops run out of bullets in combat.
Click to expand...
I'd like to see if any Rs voted for that one at all.
 
Cypress said:
I'm in favor of using every legislative trick in the book to end Bush's war. The Webb amendment was just one tool. A vote to defund the war was taken yesterday, and failed. The Webb amendment got 57 votes, but was killed. Timelines for withdrawl are getting majority votes but are getting killed. Some people are doing everything they can do End Bush's war. As Darla say, Democrats as lame as they are, are at least trying to do something. Its sad that they can only get 29 votes to defund the war, but every other option is being explored and tried, but keeps getting shot down by the GOP. Dems have been pretty lame, but its your party that is keeping this war going.
Click to expand...

Lets not forget two little tiny facts that Republicans are praying your'e going to forget:

1) A clear majority of voters want this war ended.
2) A clear majority of voters do NOT want it to end by cutting off funds.

And that's exactly why republican apologists are hoping the dems cut off funds.
 
Damocles said:
I know it wouldn't end the war. That much I know. Ending the war was what they voted against.

They knew the cloture count before taking the vote, that is political pandering.

Pretending that that vote counts as "ending the war" when they voted to fully fund it, which we know for a FACT would end the war if they chose to defund it, and then saying that they have done as they promised and worked to end the war is lying to yourself.

You are trying to convince somebody, their name is Darla.
Click to expand...

I personally would be fine with cutting off funds.

But, I'm smart. And politically it would be a huge mistake. And you know it. Don't try and pretend that I don't know it, because I do. And I'd have to advise the dems not to do it, if my job was political consultation.

And if I was a Republican consultant, I'd have to advise them to scream and yell that if the dems really wanted to end the war, they'd cut off funds, and then I'd slap a bow tie on an idiot, give him his own talk show, call him Tucker Carlson, and pay him to scream it five nights a week.
 
Cutting off funds changes the whole focus of the debate, and gives Republicans & the admin a powerful weapon against Democrats.

I don't even want them to cut off funds, much as I want the war to end. I just don't think that's the way to do it.
 
Damocles said:
I am being direct. Voting to fund the war continues the war. Voting to defund the war stops it.

Oblique comes from those who say, "Well, the Webb Amendment didn't end the war but would have made it more difficult... and funding it isn't the same as continuing it!"
Click to expand...

No, not made it more difficult. Shortened it. Some would live who will not now. That's just fact. Some would have lived..they will not live now.
 
Darla said:
Lets not forget two little tiny facts that Republicans are praying your'e going to forget:

1) A clear majority of voters want this war ended.
2) A clear majority of voters do NOT want it to end by cutting off funds.

And that's exactly why republican apologists are hoping the dems cut off funds.
Click to expand...

lol. Very insightful.

You know what? I'd like to know if alleged anti-war republicans who are crying that Dems won't cut off funding, have sent emails to their reps and senators demading a cut off of funds. My guess? Zero emails and letters have been sent. And How many demonstrations, vigils, and protests have alleged anti-war republicans participated in demanding an end to the war and a cut off of funds. Again, my guess? Zero.
 
Onceler said:
Cutting off funds changes the whole focus of the debate, and gives Republicans & the admin a powerful weapon against Democrats.

I don't even want them to cut off funds, much as I want the war to end. I just don't think that's the way to do it.
Click to expand...

Wishy washy.
 
Onceler said:
Cutting off funds changes the whole focus of the debate, and gives Republicans & the admin a powerful weapon against Democrats.

I don't even want them to cut off funds, much as I want the war to end. I just don't think that's the way to do it.
Click to expand...

Yes, exactly.

At this point, I don't even believe that cutting off the funds would end the war. We'd have to fund the troops, you can't leave them there with no funding, and I don't believe bush is bringing them home. My opinion is, cutting funding would accomplish one thing and one thing only: It would destroy the Democratic party.

And I beleive that a lot of Republicans know this. I think Damo is one of them who is smart enough to know this.
 
Cypress said:
lol. Very insightful.

You know what? I'd like to know if alleged anti-war republicans who are crying that Dems won't cut off funding, have sent emails to their reps and senators demading a cut off of funds. My guess? Zero emails and letters have been sent. And How many demonstrations, vigils, and protests have alleged anti-war republicans participated in demanding an end to the war and a cut off of funds. Again, my guess? Zero.
Click to expand...

I'm not a Republican, but I have sent several emails to Republican Congressmen. Here on campus I have created a partnership between SDS and the College LP which holds anti-war protests on our Quad every week.

What are you doing, praytell?
 
Warren said:
I'm not a Republican, but I have sent several emails to Republican Congressmen. Here on campus I have created a partnership between SDS and the College LP which holds anti-war protests on our Quad every week.

What are you doing, praytell?
Click to expand...

Posting on a message board and deriding people who have magnets on their car.
 
Warren said:
Wishy washy.
Click to expand...

No, it isn't. Usually, when Republicans say "you're putting the troops in the middle," or "you're playing politics with the troops", they're employing false outrage.

However, once you cut off funds, you ARE putting them in the middle, and playing a political game w/ them.

It is not the way to end this war.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top