Kerry-Feingold amendment fails 86-13

WASHINGTON - The GOP-controlled Senate on Thursday overwhelmingly rejected a Democratic call to start withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq by years' end, as the two parties sought to define their election-year positions on a war that has grown increasingly unpopular.

"Withdrawal is not an option. Surrender is not a solution," declared Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee, who characterized Democrats as defeatists wanting to abandon Iraq before the mission is complete.

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada, in turn, portrayed Republican leaders as blindly following President Bush's "failed" stay-the-course strategy. "It is long past time to change course in Iraq and start to end the president's open-ended commitment," he said.

In an 86-13 vote, the Senate turned back a Democratic proposal that would require the administration to withdraw all combat troops from Iraq by July 1, 2007, with redeployments beginning this year. A second vote on another Democratic proposal to begin withdrawing, but with no timetable for the war's end, was planned immediately afterward.

(more)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13477664/

Edit: title made more specific

So do the Iraqi people (87%) and the US Soldiers polled in Iraq 73%


That should be the ONLY TALKING POINT that we use about this vote.


And THAT should be the campaign issue. The senate needs lawmakers who reflect the concerns of the American and Iraqi PEOPLE for a change, instead of those doing the bidding of a delusional dictatortot.

The media won't say it - we MUST not forget to say it. The MAJORITY of American people agree with Democrats.

...with the American people.

Only 13 Dems voted in favor?

We're fucked.

He especially is a CHICKEN SHIT CHICKEN HAWK

if they are thinking :eyes:

running over a cliff. That will show Repukes as blindly following Der Leader into disaster.

I see a majority of Democrats siding with George effing Bush on that list too.

> who characterized Democrats as defeatists wanting to abandon Iraq before the mission is complete.

Didn't W say the mission was accomplished three ufcking years ago?

Withdrawal is not an option. Surrender is not a solution--You sanctimonious POS! When you lie us into war, there is no "option or solution." You just get the hell out. Period.

In other words, Senator Frist, "The jig is up!" You and your slugs have been outed. So stop with the sales pitch already!

edited for taste

Lets be intellectually honest, at least.

(2) The GOP lied to us about WMDs
(3) Certain interests want us in Iraq for quite some time.

I can't speak for the 31 "Democrats" who sided with the GOP liars. We are, after all, in an election year. Perhaps they didn't like the terms spelled out in the proposal. Perhaps they get all their "news" from the Corporate Media. Perhaps they were afraid of being painted as "soft on terrorism" by the Corporate Media, who also stands to profit from this "war." If so, this should not be tolerated, but more so, the GOP as the controlling party, needs to 'fess up to their lies and get us out of Iraq now! They got us in--they need to get us out (and just as quickly as they got us in). The "lie" isn't working anymore. The "we're in it let's win it" argument/slogan does not make for a workable foreign policy.

How's that for "intellectual honesty?"

Which of those 31 Republican-opps- I mean Democrats (?) said "The GOP lied to us about WMDs" in their floor speeches?

So when Democrats agree with and vote with Republicans, I'm supposed to pretend that it's the Republican's fault?

Read my post. I think it's self-explanatory...

Yet you suggest we ignore this transgression and blame the Republicans.

None of these "Democrats" said anything similar to the excuses you crafted on their behalf.

Do you really think it is a good strategy to ignore the fact that 31 Democrats(?) favor Bush's position but oppose yours?

As for this statement:

31 Democrats(?) favor Bush's position but oppose yours?

When has it become "my position" that the GOP lied us into war?

ABC/Washington Post: In making its case for war with Iraq, do you think the Bush Administration told the American public what it believed to be true, or intentionally misled the American public?"

Intentionally
Misled What it
believed ?
11/2/05 55 44 2
6/26/05 52 48 0
3/13/05 43 55 2
7/04 42 55 3


CBS/NYT: In making its case for the war with Iraq, do you think members of the Bush Administration intentionally misled the public or not?

Intentionally
Misled Not ?
12/6/05 52 44 4


CNN/USA/Gallup: Do you think the Bush administration deliberately misled the American public about whether Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, or not?

Deliberately
Misled Not ?
10/30/05 53 45 2
7/24/05 51 47 2
4/2/05 50 48 2
10/10/04 47 51 2
7/21/04 45 52 3
2/1/04 43 54 3
7/20/03 39 58 3
6/29/03 37 61 2
6/10/03 31 64 5
6/1/03 31 67 2

Check out the polls!
http://www.democrats.com/bush-lied-polls

It's not "my position" but the position of a majority of Americans (unless of course, like Bush, you don't believe in polls)

????????

:eyes:

....and it is clear as to why.

Bottom line- these 31 Democrats disagree with you & me and they AGREE witht the Republicans you suggest carry the sole blame.

Reality Check:
(1) The GOP controls all three branches of government
(2) The GOP lied to us about WMDs
(3) Certain interests want us in Iraq for quite some time.

I can't speak for the 31 "Democrats" who sided with the GOP liars. We are, after all, in an election year. Perhaps they didn't like the terms spelled out in the proposal. Perhaps they get all their "news" from the Corporate Media. Perhaps they were afraid of being painted as "soft on terrorism" by the Corporate Media, who also stands to profit from this "war." If so, this should not be tolerated, but more so, the GOP as the controlling party, needs to 'fess up to their lies and get us out of Iraq now! They got us in--they need to get us out (and just as quickly as they got us in). The "lie" isn't working anymore. The "we're in it let's win it" argument/slogan does not make for a workable foreign policy.

How's that for "intellectual honesty?"

So why are you asking me to answer what I already said I couldn't answer???

And, yes, I blame the GOP. Why, you might ask? Because Bush lied us into this war. And Bush is the leader of the GOP. He represents the Republicans who wholeheartedly support him. As for the 31 Democrats who appear to have voted with the GOP: I cannot speak for them. I don't know why they voted against the proposal. I made a few musings in post no. 35, but those were just that...musings.

The bottom line is: the GOP is the party in power and they alone have the responsibility to acknowledge the lies that lead to the Iraq invasion and they alone have the power to get us out...for now.

So I guess it all balances out.

In any event, I asked you which of the 31 DEMS are saying what you said about corporate media, lying about WMDs, etc. saying "'fess up to their lies and get us out of Iraq now!", etc. The answer is NONE- they are too lazy or frightened to back you up on any of that- so they took the easy way out & sided w/ Bush.

Keep on making excuses for these DEMS who side with Bush instead of you & me and see how far it gets us.

My demand for a "confession" was directed at the GOP:

...the GOP as the controlling party, needs to 'fess up to their lies and get us out of Iraq now!

I don't know what the 31 Dems are saying. That's why I said I couldn't speak for them. As for them being "too lazy or frightened"--I don't know that either. I did muse with We are, after all, in an election year. Perhaps they didn't like the terms spelled out in the proposal. Perhaps they get all their "news" from the Corporate Media. Perhaps they were afraid of being painted as "soft on terrorism" by the Corporate Media, who also stands to profit from this "war," but as I acknowledged, these were only musings.

I don't think I was "making excuses" for them...

So I guess that is the attraction.

Hey- whatever gets you through the night- me, I prefer to take up for and side with people who AGREE with me, but I'm just nuts I guess.

The President's friends are making too much money!

(reportely said by LBJ about Vietnam)

I hope the major progressive groups will start an immediate action campaign now expressing their anger about this and threaten that if the don't start paying attention to THE PEOPLE they won't be re-elected. This is outrageous!

5 Democrats jumped and voted with the GOP against any form of withdrawl of troops.

This amendment calls for a withdrawl at some point in the future, but sets no timetable (therefore making it useless anyway other than a "voice of the Senate"). The Kerry amendment calls for a withdrawl by July 2007. Both failed today.

Expect to be in Iraq for several more years....

was that Kerry/Feingold would be law. The other was a sense of the Senate resolution.

the GOP just handed us an election year gift. The public (as in "voters") is far closer to Kerry-Feingold than King George and his more-of-the-same gang.

...it is unlikely the DNC can turn this into an election year issue.

Throw the bastards out....

Republicans will laugh all the way to another victory

???

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Exactly right.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

which, of course, they will.

Surely you must have noticed that our Congressional Democrats
do NOT expect to take over the House or the Senate.
Not this year, not in 2008, not ever.

Some of them are obviously preparing to switch parties
when the Democratic label is no longer beneficial to them.

;-)

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00181#name

:evilfrown:

Grouped By Vote Position YEAs ---13

Akaka (D-HI)
Boxer (D-CA)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Wyden (D-OR)


NAYs ---86
Alexander (R-TN)
Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Burr (R-NC)
Byrd (D-WV)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carper (D-DE)
Chafee (R-RI)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
Dayton (D-MN)
DeMint (R-SC)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dole (R-NC)
Domenici (R-NM)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Frist (R-TN)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
LANDRIEU (D-LA)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Martinez (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Obama (D-IL)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Salazar (D-CO)
Santorum (R-PA)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Stevens (R-AK)
Sununu (R-NH)
Talent (R-MO)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)

Not Voting - 1
Rockefeller (D-WV)

Not. Fuck you Chuck and Hilary. New York is against this war. I think I'll move to Jersey.

"Maybe you shouldn't underestimate the staggering drawing power of the Garden State"
-Dogma

he's posturing for a run at the WH. A vote to "cut and run," as critics have successfully painted it....would have taken the air out of his sails.

The only way a candidate will lose by opposing Bush (30%) is if he acts like wimp and is too frightened to side with ordinary people

winner, IMO

we have TRUE dems in NJ - thank god - if only the rest of the dems would shapen up...

Too bad I'm moving to where both Sens (Dole, Burr) are Repukes.

It's good to be living where Democrats are Democrats.

if all the votes had been counted.

It seems Akaka and Inouye have finally learned their lesson after making a deal with the Alaskans on the ANWR bill and getting kicked in the butt on the Akaka bill.

Who are the 5....my guess....

Nelson
Nelson
Lieberman
Landrieu and......

Johnson?

Just guessing.

Answer is:

Nelson
Nelson
Lieberman
Landrieu and....

and here is where I screwed up...

the wild card was:

DAYTON.

4 out of 5.... apologies to Johnson.

Did anyone get a higher score?

And while you're here....

https://secure.nedlamont.com/page/contribute

:)

That's what primaries are for, people.

Three out of 4 Democrats voted against this measure. Why?

n/t

Beltway politicians tied to corporate funds and defense contracts are getting rich.

What do they care what US citizens think?

Not the withdrawal, but the hard timeline.

The smarter thing to do would propose a phased rollout based on set success criteria (not many people could disagree that as things improve, you need less troops).

THEN, let the republicans decide HOW successful they have been in this war. If they claim success, then they are committing to troop withdrawals. If they hold out against withdrawal, then they are admitting failure. Either way, we win.

It also blunts the "cut and run" message.

- the deadline is what did this in. The dramatic difference in the vote is a very clear indication of what people are telling their senators and it is obvious that they are against giving a specific date for withdrawal.

Your proposal regarding a phased rollout based on specific criteria sounds much more plausible and is something that people would probably accept.

It isn't a good idea for Congress to try to micromanage the President.

However, if anybody needs to be micromananged, it's this team of crooks, liars and fools.

The "founding fathers" initial instincts were correct:

ABOLISH political parties now!

All they represent is their re-election chances and the biggest contributors to their campaigns.

I'm tired of "Democrats" who side with Bush instead of their base.

Does Bush give them money & volunteer time like we do?

NO? Then what DOES he give them, hmmmmm?

and told my readers about the vote.

too

Dear Allen,

Just hours ago, the Senate voted on the Kerry-Feingold proposal to redeploy American combat troops out of Iraq by July 1, 2007. Thirteen Senators voted for it.

It was an important step towards ending the administration's aimless, open-ended course in Iraq and having Iraqis stand up for Iraq.

When Jack Murtha stepped up to the challenge of leadership in the House on Iraq, he was alone. Last week, 140 House members voted to support his leadership.

When we in the Senate began the fight to change course in Iraq, we too were almost alone. Today our numbers grew -- and that is progress you made happen.

First and foremost, Russ and I thank you for your support. Over the last few weeks, hundreds of thousands of you have joined our effort to bring our combat troops home. Once again, the johnkerry.com community has shown its deep commitment to fighting for a better course for America.

We ask you to join us now in honoring the strength and leadership of the Senators who stood with you:

Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-HI)
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), co-sponsor
Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL)
Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA)
Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-HI)
Sen. James Jeffords (I-VT)
Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA)
Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), co-sponsor
Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ)
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR)

Please call, write, or email these Senators and acknowledge their leadership on Iraq.

Let me be absolutely clear. Russ Feingold and I would have forced this vote even if the outcome were going to be 98 to 2. Ending the Bush administration's disastrous approach to this war isn't about counting votes. It isn't about legislative strategy or electoral calculation. It's about applying constant pressure to change a broken course.

It's about utterly rejecting the desperate tactics of cowardly political operatives like Karl Rove who, as John Murtha pointed out, have no qualms about telling our soldiers to "stay the course" from the comfort of their air-conditioned offices at the White House.

It's about doing what's right.

Karl Rove may worry about losing votes. It's our job to worry about young Americans losing their lives. It's our job to provide a new vision that offers real security for America while giving the Iraqis their best chance for a stable Iraq.

I will keep doing what's right on Iraq, and I won't stop until our troops are home and the future of Iraq is in the hands of the Iraqi people.

I know you'll keep working right alongside me.

Sincerely,

John Kerry

n/t

:thumbsup:

I think in the back of his mind he knows there were big problems with the Ohio vote. And it has motivated him even more to fight for progressive principles.

:loveya:

tough talk a little too late there my friend. If you weren't worried about votes in the first place our kids might not be in there now.

Glad you seem to have finally found your sack again when the polls of course seem to favor this position.

Feingold on the other hand I have nothing but respect for he has been on the right side of this since the get go and damn the polls one way or the other.

It is never too late to do the right thing. Are you holding other Dems accountable for their votes or are you just in this thread bashing Kerry to promote Feingold or just wishing it was someone other than Kerry working with Feingold?

I am sorry, but I am glad these two are working together. I would never bash another dem then turn around and praise another.

Have you called your senators? Did they vote for or against the Kerry/Feingold amendment?

At least the person you are complaining about has started the debate and is helping to work and get us out of this mess.


And BTW: Kerry NEVER supported or voted for this war. THIS IS BUSH'S WAR and no one else's period.

It's the "deadline" that was the poison pill in the bill.

???

real about this stupid occupation. They are literally running on borrowed time, man power, and money.

It will be interesting to see how the justification for these votes changes as the months go by.

Very disheartening. I think we Democrats must start having a unified message. I vote for the phased withdrawal starting now option. Keep up the mantra that the Iraqis must govern themselves. Plus, the war was a disaster, actually increasing the terror threat. That's what happens when you illegally invade a country that was no threat.

It's ok, folks. I know they didn't expect this to pass; and I doubt they expected to get close.

What is important is not what gets passed, but that we keep forcing the Republicans to defend THEIR war.

use this strong, tough guy talk because they know Iraq is going to ask us to leave soon? It wouldn't be a withdrawal or surrender then would it? :shrug: Just guessing - I can't think of any reason why they would think this "stay the course" macho crap is helping them - the polls show more and more people want an end to this mess.

saying on CNN, "Absolutely the worst possible thing we could do at this point
would be to validate and encourage the terrorists by doing exactly what
they want us to do, which is to leave before I get all of my money!!!":sarcasm:

Iraq until the oil is secured. Good luck with staying the course on that, BushCo and DINOs. When will that be?
:puke:

Why pretending?