Do these votes today mean we are never getting out of Iraq??

Because even if Democrats take back the House or Senate, why would these Democrats that voted the way they did today change their vote either 2 or 4 years from now? We cannot win enough seats to change this House or Senate, it seems? Am I wrong? Will these people continue to vote for this war no matter what?

That's the reason their support of "stay the course" is so disturbing to me, and many others.

They offer no real change in plans from what the republicans are giving us.

We have a few gems, that are worthy of the Democrat label. The rest are Corporate Fascist just like the entire GOP. That is the cold hard truth.

It's not about babies dying or mosques being blown up, or elderly Americans going hungry because they can't afford food anymore, no, it's about their political manipulations and maneuverings! Of course they say one thing now based on the electibility factor (aka procuring corporate donations) but really, once they take over the House and the Senate, they will all, without a doubt, work for the good of the common people, by ending the war, repealing NAFTA/CAFTA, shrinking the military, perfecting our schools, providing health care to all, and rainbows and unicorns will fill our blissful days!!!

:sarcasm:

It has nothing to do with the welfare of the average Iraqi citizen (i.e. "the enemy") and everything to do with a "litmus test" for the Iraqi ruling elite that ensures global corporations have entitlements that trump an Iraqi's rights to clean water, reliable energy, safe schools, and an unemployment rate below 25% (import that labor!).

As long as Iraqis oppose economic inequity, occupation of their communities by foreign troops, bombing of their weddings, high unemployment, home invasions in the middle of the night, and decimation of their towns and cities, the Global Corporatist Security Force will occupy their land and be immune to any of their laws.

The vote was 60-39, correct? That`s all we could dredge up? 39 votes?

those who oppose endless killings and wating money to those who don't give a shit

enough people from the respective states have not died in the Iraq effort... How many will it take before they realize?

or else they are members of the Likud wing of the Democratic Party

.....requirement that any House of Rep or Senator voting for war at any time had to have one immediate family member enlisted - not drafted - in some branch of active duty for the duration of the war. So if one family member is injured or dies then another family member must enlist or the Senator/Congress person has no war vote. War would instantly become a thing of the past.

No one thought, for a second, that the MAJORITY of the Senate would vote to leave Iraq. I mean, forget that!! No WAY that was gonna happen. If we take the Senate back, I WOULD expect the vote to shift.

The reasons for the vote today were many: you have Senators who vote to suck up because they have a piece of legislation that they need a GOPig co-sponsor for, you have Senators whose states are over-conservative, and you have the few idiotic hawks who can't see what's going on over there because when they whizzed through the Green Zone, it was fairly quiet. This was a lost cause from the git-go, because we do NOT HAVE A MAJORITY. Once we have a majority, our majority leader can tan the hides of anyone who strays from the platform paths. The committees giveth, and the committees taketh away....

bring the party in line. It works as long as there is hope to win but no one is going to put their election in jeopardy for a vote we knew would not win. What Kerry's bill did was bring it out in the open and get the word out to more people. Most bills go through a process like this until finally they are passed - sometimes much later.

That is the choice.

America has made it's decision. America is just as responsible as the Divider. Don't forget it, ever.

tatement by John Kerry on the Kerry-Feingold-Boxer-Leahy Amendment



Below is a statement from John Kerry on his amendment to redeploy U.S. combat forces from Iraq by July 1, 2007, with a rapid reaction force staged elsewhere in the Middle East. Troops to conduct targeted counter-terrorism operations, those essential to finish training Iraqi security forces, and those needed to protect U.S. personnel and facilities would remain in Iraq.



13 Senators voted for the amendment today.



“This vote today was a dramatic step forward in forcing a Congress that shares responsibility for getting us into Iraq to take responsibility for finally getting the policy right in Iraq.


tatement by John Kerry on the Kerry-Feingold-Boxer-Leahy Amendment



Below is a statement from John Kerry on his amendment to redeploy U.S. combat forces from Iraq by July 1, 2007, with a rapid reaction force staged elsewhere in the Middle East. Troops to conduct targeted counter-terrorism operations, those essential to finish training Iraqi security forces, and those needed to protect U.S. personnel and facilities would remain in Iraq.



13 Senators voted for the amendment today.



“This vote today was a dramatic step forward in forcing a Congress that shares responsibility for getting us into Iraq to take responsibility for finally getting the policy right in Iraq.



“It was a vote to do what’s right for our troops, our country, and Iraq. Our numbers are growing and our ability to apply constant pressure to change course is stronger than it was just a week ago.



“Setting a deadline to redeploy U.S. troops from Iraq is necessary for success in Iraq and victory in the war on terror. Iraqi politicians have proven they only respond to deadlines - a deadline to transfer authority, deadlines to hold two elections and a referendum, and a deadline to form a government. Now we need another deadline to get Iraq up on its own two feet. Our troops have done their part, it’s time for the politicians in Iraq and the United States to do their job.



“Half the names on the Vietnam Wall are there because old men in Washington were too proud to admit a mistake, so they kept sending young men to stay a course they knew was not working. ‘Stay the course’ is not a strategy for victory in Iraq and the War on Terror. This administration is wrong. It is time to get Iraq right.”



“It was a vote to do what’s right for our troops, our country, and Iraq. Our numbers are growing and our ability to apply constant pressure to change course is stronger than it was just a week ago.



“Setting a deadline to redeploy U.S. troops from Iraq is necessary for success in Iraq and victory in the war on terror. Iraqi politicians have proven they only respond to deadlines - a deadline to transfer authority, deadlines to hold two elections and a referendum, and a deadline to form a government. Now we need another deadline to get Iraq up on its own two feet. Our troops have done their part, it’s time for the politicians in Iraq and the United States to do their job.



“Half the names on the Vietnam Wall are there because old men in Washington were too proud to admit a mistake, so they kept sending young men to stay a course they knew was not working. ‘Stay the course’ is not a strategy for victory in Iraq and the War on Terror. This administration is wrong. It is time to get Iraq right.”

MEANS WE'RE NEVER GETTING OUT OF IRAQ!

Not enough people are protesting, lots of people are spending far too much time online and far too little in public, on the streets, but please don't say 'no one is protesting today'. Because that does a disservice to those who are.

And believe me, we are. We protest everyday at rush hour in my town. These days I make it there 3 or 4 times a week rather than five (I also work full-time so it burns me out to go every day). And I KNOW we are not alone. I know there are people doing this in towns across America.

My question is, where the hell is everyone else? Anyone who spends an hour a day on DU should spend half that time in the streets.

Jeffersons Ghost - I hope you know I am not directing this rant at you, I just needed to get it out.

Peace & Solidarity! :patriot:

HEAR HEAR TO THAT!

With the attendent bloodshed required to do so.