Well, at least the majority of Senators admit Bush has failed.
It's a start.

Given the fact that Lindsay Grahamcracker considers the surge to be the biggest military victory in American history, I expect there will be the usual Republican Idiot vote to keep Americans dying so Bush doesn't have to admit failure on his watch.

And now we know why the "Dem congress" can't get anything the American people want accomplished.

Don't listen to the ineffectiveness of the Dem controlled Congress BS.

Americans want our troops out and Repubs just defied the will of the American people.

It's what I've been saying for months: if it doesn't pass parliamentary procedure, it doesn't pass.

Anyone wanting a blueprint of the next 14 months should read Robert's Rules of Order.

Read something that blew me away yesterday. Apparently, every week, 120 iraq vets are committing suicide. Total number of suicides in 2005: 6256, an average of 17 a day.

Same war, different type of victim.

THE REPUBLICAN MINORITY BEAT THE DEMOCRATIC MAJORITY AGAIN!!!!!

In a couple weeks the democratic party will just roll over and give the republicans the money with no string AGAIN.

It is with shaking head wonder why anyone would vote for this leaderless do nothing DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

It is with shaking head wonder why anyone would vote for this leaderless do nothing DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

Posted by moneywar

Stay tuned for the '08 vote Mr Republican.

Stay tuned for the '08 vote Mr Republican.

Without a doubt we will get the white house, but I think your foolish to think we will carry a majority in congress.

The democratic party has consistantly proved it is unable to lead this nation in representing the peoples wants and needs.

I know I will not vote a democrat to congress, the presidential is soon coming up for grabs.

And Mitch McConnell's "no strings attached" counter offering went down even worse - 45 to close the debate.

I know I will not vote a democrat to congress, the presidential is soon coming up for grabs.

Posted by moneywar at 2007-11-16 08:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

Trees,

The fact that you would blame the democrats would be the blame for submitting the same bill until it passes explains alot.

You keep falling into the political partisan pandering mantra by being worried about the republicans and giving bad press. What you don't realize, AMERICA wants the troops home, the bad press will be seen as blah blah blah except for those 26% who still want the war.

I guess we should just layoff all our politicians until the next election and hope one party gets 60 votes so they can actually do something.

Making excuses for this lame do nothing democratic party is nothing but lazy partisan hacking.

Like I said, the minority will get what they want and it is with aw that you are making excuses for the majority. Apparently being minority gets the power of leadership.

Trees,

The fact that you would blame the democrats would be the blame for submitting the same bill until it passes explains alot.

You keep falling into the political partisan pandering mantra by being worried about the republicans and giving bad press. What you don't realize, AMERICA wants the troops home, the bad press will be seen as blah blah blah except for those 26% who still want the war.

I guess we should just layoff all our politicians until the next election and hope one party gets 60 votes so they can actually do something.

Making excuses for this lame do nothing democratic party is nothing but lazy partisan hacking.

Like I said, the minority will get what they want and it is with aw that you are making excuses for the majority. Apparently being minority gets the power of leadership.

Posted by moneywar at 2007-11-16 09:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

Do you not know that without 60 votes to close debate a bill cannot be brought to the floor for a vote?

Apparently that just holds firm to the DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

Clearly we have seen over the last few years the Republican party doesn't need 60 votes.

I don't think I was insulting you in the least, and yet you came out of the gate swinging?


Moneywar? insulting????


No way!!!

Anyone wanting a blueprint of the next 14 months should read Robert's Rules of Order.

Posted by Danforth at 2007-11-16 07:38 PM |

Send a copy to Obama--Have you seen how he attempts to run the Senate? It's a scream on c-span.

And yes--just like what the Dems did when the Repubs were the majority--they block the vote by voting no to end the debate and have the real vote.

And what is horrible is Harry "The body" Reid stating that Gates says they have enough money to run the military until February. There is an article in the Washington Times that disputes that and layoffs are expected. Can't send the supplies or the equipment--Harry is a fibber. Who knew?

Dopey Dems --couldn't stop the funding either--but the House in their latest 41st attempt to do so--did pass. But the Senate doesn't have the numbers.

Murphy

Moneywar? insulting????


No way!!!

Posted by eberly at 2007-11-16 09:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

Do you not know that without 60 votes to close debate a bill cannot be brought to the floor for a vote?

Apparently that just holds firm to the DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

Clearly we have seen over the last few years the Republican party doesn't need 60 votes.



Posted by moneywar at 2007-11-16 09:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

Money--the Dems were doing the same thing to the Repubs when they were the minority--

How can you forget--give the nominee an up or down vote--the nu-cle-ar option talk and all.

Same thing--just the party is swapped.

Murphy

Trees,

I felt no need of answering questions that are meaningless.

If the republicans want the money for bush then they will sign the bill as presented.

Who is playing the politics? The DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

The odd thing is if this was your board for your business and the majority caved because they were worried about appearances you would fire them.

I am sorry if you think I was name callin, it was not my intent. I did mean to project a tone of disappointment in your reasoned thoughts of party politics.

I am tired of the democrats making excuses for this do nothing congress in democrat majority. It reminds me of the BOWA's, BLT's, and other one sided idiots.

Why have things not changed, because the democrats are acting just like the republicans.

And the reason the Repubs passed all those bills was because they were spending like drunks in Las Vegas and the Dems were getting a piece of it.

Then they would get the number 40 plus to bring the vote to the floor.

They dont have the numbers to kill the war spending.

But that moron Reid can stand up there and say we are going on vacation and the troops have enough money--and that is a lie--per the W/Times.

It is a good thing though when the Congress is out--then they can't phuck things up.


Murphy

The difference between you and I trees is I don't give blind support for doing nothing, in fact, I punish it.

If you think callin you a partisan hack is out of line then why are you the one making excuses for this do nothing democrats.

I kind of laugh, the democrats just don't understand, they are so worried about getting bad press and blame and not getting more the next election that they haven't figured out they won't even have the majority.

STOP playing the politics with these republican pandering media thugs, actions will get the peoples votes far better than any bad press. Actions can be proven.

Why have things not changed, because the democrats are acting just like the republicans.

Posted by moneywar at 2007-11-16 09:36 PM


You are likely correct on that point Money--and due to the fact they only have one extra Dem in the Senate.

And in order to get the Dems they got voted into office --was to have Dems who were moderates and little hawkish and pro life to pass by the Red Staters into office.

I will agree that both parties have sever shortcomings.

Murphy

I've got all night, sport.

So do I, Hack.

Per Money--

If the republicans want the money for bush then they will sign the bill as presented.

No they won't because the Dems put in stupid conditions--like 15 day notice must be given to the friggin Dems to move the troops and that is the stupidest thing ever concocted by the Dems--but I'm sure they will top that--given them enough time.

So NO--the Repubs were not going to pass that bill. Duh!

Murphy

Trees,

I felt no need of answering questions that are meaningless.

If the republicans want the money for bush then they will sign the bill as presented.

Who is playing the politics? The DEMOCRATIC PARTY.

The odd thing is if this was your board for your business and the majority caved because they were worried about appearances you would fire them.

I am sorry if you think I was name callin, it was not my intent. I did mean to project a tone of disappointment in your reasoned thoughts of party politics.

I am tired of the democrats making excuses for this do nothing congress in democrat majority. It reminds me of the BOWA's, BLT's, and other one sided idiots.

Why have things not changed, because the democrats are acting just like the republicans.Posted by moneywar at 2007-11-16 09:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

The difference between you and I trees is I don't give blind support for doing nothing, in fact, I punish it.

I've got all night, sport.

So do I, Hack.

Posted by moneywar at 2007-11-16 09:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

They are only meaningless because you are unable to answer them. They are legitimate questions to anyone who is bitching as loudly as you are about the massive one vote Democratic majority in the Senate. The fact that you dismiss them so you don't have to back up your (Nixon quote)"argument" says a lot.

LOL! OK, I can't answer them, but some how I think I did. But it appears you are PCing the name callin in such a obtuse way.

Murphy-
You cite the Washington Times a lot. Are you aware that it is a money-losing enterprise propped up by its owner, the Reverend Sun Myung Moon?

The lack of reasoning in that statement is mind boggling. The republicans want the money and do not want the timelines. They will not vote for it until it is to their liking.

Right out of the gate, wow!

This is my lack of reasoning skills, haw! Do the republicans want the money for Bush or not? You mean the republicans will hold out forever denying the troops money and the democrats will always be blamed FOR DOING WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT. Yes, I see I really lack reasoning skills.

how would you convince NINE Republicans to vote with the Democrats?

And I will tell you AGAIN, if they want the money they will sign the bill.

Your both right the answer is not more Dems but more Independants in the Senate, what I am afraid of though is Trees is going to get her 60 and Hil will get the White House and then well be in for 4 more years of the corporate agenda.

We need a senate with enough RP's and DennisK's and one of them in the top spot to see any real change in this country.

Barring that we need a senate and congress stacked oposite of the president. Given the SC is mostly right that means a Dem pres and a Rep Senate and Congress.

Moneywar,

You set the tone of this exchange. I'm just responding in a manner that you can understand.

You don't get to have it both ways. Sorry.

Now try answering the questions and offering an alternative or do you lack the reasoning skills to do that?

Of course, because public relations plays no part in a successful business. Also, because the Parlimentary rules don't generally apply to a corporate board of directors, or investors, do you really know what you're talking about.


Parlimentary rules???? And do I know what I'm talking about.

Nothing but excuses here. No matter how you want to parce, slice, display how this works in the end it is only excuses and you know what, it is partisan hacking.

Again, I expect action out of those who are supposed to represent me and Public relations isn't one of them in the simplest of terms.

No the difference between you and I is that I have a grasp on logic. You have blind hatred because you're not getting your way.

You can't argue an alternative, you can't answer simple questions, you just call names.

You're a moron and kind of an ass too.

LOL! Talk about the name callin...moron and ass...well I guess I don't have to sink this low.

Blinded hatred because I don't get my way....LOL! No it is expectation for my representatives to do what I ask, it is what I pay them for and elect them to do. That is not partisan hacking that is demanding they do their job.

Nothing but excuses here. No matter how you want to parce, slice, display how this works in the end it is only excuses and you know what, it is partisan hacking.

Again, I expect action out of those who are supposed to represent me and Public relations isn't one of them in the simplest of terms.

Posted by moneywar at 2007-11-16 10:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

Oorah-
re: In reality, the public wants to WIN... and frustration isn't so much a "we've got to leave tomorrow" as it is "why can't we just pound the sh*t out of those ragheads and come home." Big difference in the two and a major difference in the two parties' outlook.

Do you think that if "we just pound the sh*t out of those ragheads and come home." our war of liberation would be complete?

LOL! Talk about the name callin...moron and ass...well I guess I don't have to sink this low.

Blinded hatred because I don't get my way....LOL! No it is expectation for my representatives to do what I ask, it is what I pay them for and elect them to do. That is not partisan hacking that is demanding they do their job.



Posted by moneywar at 2007-11-16 10:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

Moneywar,

You set the tone of this exchange. I'm just responding in a manner that you can understand.

You don't get to have it both ways. Sorry.

Now try answering the questions and offering an alternative or do you lack the reasoning skills to do that?

Posted by TreesGoneWild at 2007-11-16 10:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

Again, I expect action out of those who are supposed to represent me and Public relations isn't one of them

Yes it is, the public relations you expect is that they do what you want, then you will have good relations with them. The thing is they represent a cross section of people many of whom live close to you, your friends and neighbors and co-workers. If they don't do what you want and, they still get elected, they have good relations and do what the majority of voters want. Maybe it's what you want that is wrong?

Now try answering the questions and offering an alternative or do you lack the reasoning skills to do that?

You can say this until the cows come home but it clear you don't understand.

I DON'T WANT AN ALTERNATIVE, is that loud enough for you to understand you highly reasoned cloud sitting repeating BOWO-ish democrat hack.

Keep pushing the bill to the floor until they need the money, when they need it they will sign it.

Now that is called "forced politics" and it is how large business's get things done all the time. The difference is they are not doing it for public relation worries, they do it to GET THINGS DONE.

what do you think they should do to side step the rules of order to get what you want?

I would also like that answered.

The Democrates don't have enough votes in Senate to over-ride a veto.

"What do you think they should do to side step the rules of order to get what you want?"

Murphy-
You cite the Washington Times a lot. Are you aware that it is a money-losing enterprise propped up by its owner, the Reverend Sun Myung Moon?

Posted by Cooper at 2007-11-16 09:59 PM |


Hey Boyd--all the newspapers are losing money and propped up by someone.

I only cited them for this one issue of what Reid claims Gage says --that the military can manage until February--when it's not what the man says in the W/Times.


And I will tell you AGAIN, if they want the money they will sign the bill.

Posted by moneywar at 2007-11-16 10:03 PM

NO--they won't sign the bill with time lines and notice to move the troops 15 days ahead of time.

Don't hold your breath MOney--the Dems will pass a spending bill--they have done so since they are ahead one Dem in the Senate.

I hear your pain--and enjoying it... ;o)


Murphy

Keep pushing the bill to the floor until they need the money, when they need it they will sign it.

OKAY! I agree. The Dems are cowards. They are too afraid of being accused of being anti-soldier. The Dems should grow some balls. They should turn right around, and claim Bush is against the troops for not signing the funding bill.

o how should the Democrats circumvent the rules to get what you want?

Well I don't know, this is not one of my ideas, it is yours. Some how within your bright reasoning skills you have some how attributed these things of questions as how it should change.

They are your wants or ideas, not mine and no matter how much you want to attribute your ideas to me will not make it so or happen.

I don't want the democrats to circumvent the rules, I want them to force the hand.

I notice the whole time you avoid the whole idea of if they want the money they will sign the bill.

Why is that? Partisan hacking no doubt. To worried about election than getting actual work done and you don't like me because I could careless about their election agendas, I want work done.

Now try answering the questions and offering an alternative or do you lack the reasoning skills to do that?

You can say this until the cows come home but it clear you don't understand.

I DON'T WANT AN ALTERNATIVE, is that loud enough for you to understand you highly reasoned cloud sitting repeating BOWO-ish democrat hack.

Keep pushing the bill to the floor until they need the money, when they need it they will sign it.

Now that is called "forced politics" and it is how large business's get things done all the time. The difference is they are not doing it for public relation worries, they do it to GET THINGS DONE.

Posted by moneywar at 2007-11-16 10:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

Or do you not understand the mentality of the other side? They will not vote for a bill that includes timelines, period. They will not do it.

And if you think that BushCo doesn't have a funding contingency plan, you are crazy.

So what will happen is that the Democrats will be rightfully painted as denying our troops funding and sink like a stone. I'm beginning to think this is honestly what you want to happen. So you're either bugshit crazy or you're a NeoCon.

On top of being astonishingly stupid.

o how should the Democrats circumvent the rules to get what you want?

Well I don't know, this is not one of my ideas, it is yours. Some how within your bright reasoning skills you have some how attributed these things of questions as how it should change.

They are your wants or ideas, not mine and no matter how much you want to attribute your ideas to me will not make it so or happen.

I don't want the democrats to circumvent the rules, I want them to force the hand.

I notice the whole time you avoid the whole idea of if they want the money they will sign the bill.

Why is that? Partisan hacking no doubt. To worried about election than getting actual work done and you don't like me because I could careless about their election agendas, I want work done.

OKAY! I agree. The Dems are cowards.

Wow! One person that can say this.

And is this the type of people you want running our country and making decisions about our troops?

The Dems are cowards and NO I don't want them running the country..


Murphy

So how many of our bravest men and women will have to go without what they need to fight in Bush's folly during this period of forced politics?

Not one, I would pity the Republican that took this stand in their next election.

The democrats are not the ones refusing to give the money, it is the republicans. How is it you don't see this?

So what will happen is that the Democrats will be rightfully painted as denying our troops funding and sink like a stone. I'm beginning to think this is honestly what you want to happen. So you're either bugshit crazy or you're a NeoCon.

On top of being astonishingly stupid.

To this,


But what ever you need to sling at me to compensate for your universal shortcomings is fine. I'm not a thin skinned little pansy.

LOL!


And I have universal shortcomings because I don't agree with your political ideals? Sounds to me like the republicans been saying this for the last 7 years but some how your different.......right!

And is this the type of people you want running our country and making decisions about our troops?

As opposed to the other bunch, who if left in power will also have us in Iran? I'm sick of it too, but unfortunately we are again left with the choice of who will do the least damage.

Money--you point to the Dems and someone points to the Repubs--it is a matter of POV.

The Repubs will vote for a spending bill without the timelines and idiotic notice of 15 days BS.

Because of what exactly Trees says--they don't want to look like idiots and not supporting the troops--they already are responsible for the killing of 2.5 million slaughtered after Vietnam--and they can't afford that with the terrorists--Not right now in modern history.

And Bush will VETO the bill and they will NEVER get 2/3 to override the VETO.

Get it ! ??

So you can bitch and moan about "the Dems YOU put into power" and "Not doing anything productive"...blah blah blah..

Truth is--Americans want to win --BEFORE they pull the troops or the funding.

Murphy

As opposed to the other bunch, who if left in power will also have us in Iran? I'm sick of it too, but unfortunately we are again left with the choice of who will do the least damage.

Posted by Whatsleft at 2007-11-16 10:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

Last year when the democrats did this same exact thing it took damn near 6 months to get back on a reasonable ground with the people.

I don't know but looking at the polls for how the people of this country feel about the majority congress and I would say stop repeating the same things over and over again.

The people want the troops home, unless you are saying that the voice spoken a few years back has just been forgotton by the people.

The surge is working yet 2007 was the bloodiest year since the war started.

I am not the one worried about if a democrat gets into office, you are, so how am I the hack?

And Boyd--

I don't give a shit who is running the W/Times or the LA Times or the Chronicle or the PI Intelligencier--bs.

They are all in the toilet and it doesn't matter who is running the newsPAPER of your city of choice--they are all losers.

I don't read them--except when they are the thred of choice here on the DR.

Murphy

As opposed to the other bunch, who if left in power will also have us in Iran? I'm sick of it too, but unfortunately we are again left with the choice of who will do the least damage.

Posted by Whatsleft at 2007-11-16 10:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

Welcome to the reality of the situation, a reality that Moneywar actively denies.

This is too funny, and I am the one being called stupid here.

And I have universal shortcomings because I don't agree with your political ideals? Sounds to me like the republicans been saying this for the last 7 years but some how your different.......right!


Posted by moneywar at 2007-11-16 10:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

This is too funny, and I am the one being called stupid here.




Posted by moneywar at 2007-11-16 10:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

Murphy,

Your posts are so globally all over the place it is difficult to even comment on the clear partisan hacking your doing.

Are you blond?

Money--the surge has worked--

The number of deaths of our brave troops is down--from the start of August--and the number of civilians is down.

The number of IED's is down

The militias are cooperating with the US more than they have ever been before.

Now there are still problems--but Rumsfeld may have been right that there will always be bombongs in Iraq.

Bush should have put more emphasis on winning the battle--or the war-- before putting the democratic processes in place.

I mean you can have three elections in Iraq--which is a huge feat--by any measure.

But if the battles and insurgencies were put down--like the US did in Japan and Germany--you might be seeing things differently.

Just a thought...

Murphy

Murphy-
Praise Jesus (er..the Rev. Moon)!

Murphy,

Your posts are so globally all over the place it is difficult to even comment on the clear partisan hacking your doing.

Are you blond?

per Moneywar--

Only if you can spell the word blonde... ;o)


Murphy

"But with lawmakers eager to head home for the Thanksgiving recess, there was little rhetoric on the floor and the votes were taken in quick succession."

- This line alone should have all of us spitting mad! EAGER TO GO

HOME!!! Fuck you, I think there are a lot of husbands, wives,

fathers, brothers, sisters, kids that want to come home from Iraq

but they cant just choose to stop working!

"There is enough money in the defense spending bill that Mr. Bush signed earlier this week to keep the military operations going through mid-February, because of a provision that allows the Defense Department to shift money from other Pentagon accounts."

- Stop funding NOW, the Pentagon has more than enough means to

bring them home. Fear mongering at its best!

The Dems could end this if they really had an interest in ending it. The Dems are using Iraq for political position

Trees,

You have convinced me of nothing, you have not brought up one single point other than to justify why the congress shouldn't do anything.

You use political jargon for the excuse. You think because they can't get 60 votes they should just give the president what he wants. You can't seem to see any other avenues of taking action because they don't have the votes.

Well, keep forcing the bill until they pass it is taking action but you dismiss this why........oops, it isn't because of partisan politics, but in the same breath you state it will make the party look bad and take the blame. Now I find that reasoning of this not being partisan humorous.

By your reasoning the congress should just go home and wait until a real true election can be had with more than 60 democrats before they should begin again.

The only failing leadership in this country is coming from people who allow such excuses for our official doing nothing. No matter how much you would like to use the voting as a reason it is an excuse. I notice you don't refute the postulation I have stated, it just looks like the democrats might get media back lash.

Your like a parent who swears like a trucker but tells your kids not to and expects them in to follow you words. Well, if you don't swear in the first place, your kids won't either.

Actions speak louder than words, and it has been this way since the dawn of time. but you go ahead and excuse the in action for fear of false words. Now the real question is, are the words really false.

Welcome to the reality of the situation, a reality that Moneywar actively denies.

Fact is you're both correct.

The Dems a cowards. The voters gave them a majority because they want our troops out of Iraq. The Dems have done nothing but superficial posturing to this end. On the other hand, the Repubs got us into this mess. Why would we put them back in power? Just to mess up another country? To give another 1.5 Trillion to the profiteers? That's nuts!

The best thing we can do is maintain a Democratic majority in congress, while we elect a president that will get us out of Iraq. I don't care if the next prez is a Democrat or not! It may be to much to hope for, but it would also be nice if they would start showing some fiscal responsibility after '08. First we have to get out of Iraq, and quit rewarding the war profiteers.

Money--the surge has worked--

The number of deaths of our brave troops is down--from the start of August--and the number of civilians is down.

Murphy,

I will briefly give you some food for thought.

August...what is the temperature is it doing this time and how many go about doing this time historically?

Again, I will say this, 2007 has been the bloodiest year since the war began but you can continue to spout that it is down from august. I notice as the temperatures get more reasonable the media talks less and less about this surge....why is that???

The one thing about Americans is that WE ARE WINNERS!!

We will NOT go into defeat like Vietnam--tooooo many people remember that--

Sorry--

And Americans Want to Win--there is a limit--but it is NOT thru the asshole Dems--who apparently want to lose.

The war will be continued to be funded and there will be moaning and groaning.

But the Dmes will give the President what he wants--

It's very simple.

You may not like it--but the alternative to a defeat with 2.5 million slaughtered is not going to happen on the Dems or the Repubs watch...

Murphy

Trees,

You have convinced me of nothing, you have not brought up one single point other than to justify why the congress shouldn't do anything.

You use political jargon for the excuse. You think because they can't get 60 votes they should just give the president what he wants. You can't seem to see any other avenues of taking action because they don't have the votes.

Well, keep forcing the bill until they pass it is taking action but you dismiss this why........oops, it isn't because of partisan politics, but in the same breath you state it will make the party look bad and take the blame. Now I find that reasoning of this not being partisan humorous.

Murphy, ok I see your point but the Dems should force GW's hand. Stop funding and force George to flinch and recall the troops. Vote on it daily. I dont know, maybe I'm too nieve but I think the majority should be able to affect some change that 70% of American's would support. If the Dems were serious about bringing the troops home they could do it, rather the Dems are more worried about Political positioning.

"Are you familiar what happens during a deadlock?" Probably about the same as when Congress goes on Thanksgiving vacation.

Murphy to clarify -" the Pentagon has more than enough means to

bring them home" You can stop funding and bring troops home, but you could not continue to fight.

Can you begin to fathom what will happen to other vital legislation during a congressional deadlock?

First, we are not talking about other vital legislation and do recognize that they have done nothing interms of healthcare, poverty, offshoring, fair trade, wiretapping, torture and other civil liberties, but I will give them just a little less critique on these issues because of the lack of votes, but do notice a few of the glaring issues have not really been addressed in full like they should be.

This legislation is not like the others, this requires something the republicans want, so if they want it they will sign it.

Captainooooo--

That is precisely the point--We are in this fight for probably the next 20 years--JMHO...

And Reid's Christmas wish--if Mormons have Christmas wishes--

Is to bring home the troops in DEFEAT--they will fail--no matter what the polls say--Because they don't even ask if you--YOU --Do YOU want to bring home the troops to LOSING--then they will say--"NO" they do not!

ANd the fight will Never be over--over there!

It will continue until we kill 100,000 or a million terrorists--likely the latter. Bush--as much as folks hate or disagree is trying to do something that is unheard of--bring Democracy to the part of the world that has NEVER HAD IT!

So we will continue and depsite the Kukucinish's of the Left part of the Dem party--we will Win--

And You Sir will be happy because of it --and so will your children and your children's children..

Murphy

August...what is the temperature is it doing this time and how many go about doing this time historically?


And how do you explain October and November Money???

You just can't get over the FACT that maybe--just maybe the tide has turned in Iraq--that thing MIGHT just be getting better--YOU can't stand it--You would have a better arguement when thing are sour and going to shit in a handbag.

YOU would just love that! Admit it!!

Just be brave and say it--you want the surge and Bush and the Repubs and the Dems to ALL lose--because that would some how make you feel good about your dire predictions and the sky is falling and we are losing and MUST continue to lose.

What is your beef Money-??-you are so sour and grimm and out of touch--a disconnect if you will--??

We are all here to be right--but it is something else to admit you might be wrong and maybe something is going right and to say ---Cautiously--I hope it continues to work....

Murphy

Trees,

You paint the whole party with the same brush and you don't see the bigger picture of how that kind of deadlock would effect this nation.

But then again, maybe you just haven't thought about the greater consequences of the Democrats doing what you wish they would do.

Your arrogance and standing up in the clouds is fully revealed here.

I don't see the bigger picture? Have you ever thought that there is more than one picture, or more than one way to do the dishes. I clearly see how deadlock effects the nation, I have lived it the last 2 years.

And please please tell me what the greater consequences of the democrats standing firm and forcing the republicans hands. Come on please tell me how this nation of people who over whelmingly support this wars end will be so damning for the party. Please, I want to hear this rhetorical conjecture that is not at all political partisan of any type of hacking.

Murphy,

Sorry but I don't convolute my political thoughts with blind will full abdication so my party can be justified in continued bad behavior.

2007 is the bloodiest year since the war has started and nothing you can say will make this simple fact go away. The amasing thing about this is 2007 is not over yet but you rant about how well it is going over there.

Tell me, how does August 2007 to present compare to the same time in 2006?

Sorry, but Moneywar's correct. The Dems and a few Reps finally agree, send a funding bill to Bush with constraints on it. Bush doesn't like it - Bush vetoes it, Bush gets nothing. Bush had his chance.

It's either do that, or not fund the war at all.

This is the message that's being sent by Reid/Pelosi right now. At least through the end of this year (big whoop).

The only question is will the Dems have the courage to keep it up next year.

Bush and the Pentagon should have gotten the message by the polls and the last election. Instead they've made no plans to get us out and now they're whining about not being able to keep going.

Guess what? Too damn bad. The writing's on the wall. It would be prudent to stop spending outrageous amounts of money on "contractors" and fund the Troops enough to get them out of there NOW.

The rest is spinning, justification and face saving for politics, pride and fear.

Murphy,

We are all here to be right--but it is something else to admit you might be wrong and maybe something is going right and to say ---Cautiously--I hope it continues to work....

No, I am not here to be right, I am here to gather diverse opinions to change my own. Believe it or not, I really enjoyed the crossing with Trees. Not that she did anything to change my mind but it allows me to truely understand her reasoning and cognition skills on how she comes to her conclusions.

Something I was very PC about how you come to your conclusions, I am still not sure if they are yours or someone elses. Why is that?

And please please tell me what the greater consequences of the democrats standing firm and forcing the republicans hands. Come on please tell me how this nation of people who over whelmingly support this wars end will be so damning for the party.

I agree with you on this one, Moneywar.
The Dems have nothing to lose by standing firm. Anyone with half a brain knows that this has nothing to do with the Dems not supporting the troops yet that is the brush the Dems allow Bush to paint them with each and every time he demands more billions for his war and/or refuses to even give a distant timeline for eventual withdrawal of our troops.

Face it -- Bush has built a U.S. Embassy in Iraq 3 times the size of the Vatican and he has no intention of ever leaving Iraq. Our troops will be there longer than our troops on the DMZ in Korea. Bush and big oil aren't about to give up control of those oil reserves.

I sometimes think if Bush hadn't been such an arrogant liar and had just been honest with this country and said "If we don't get control of Iraq's oil then Communist China will and will use it to build the biggest military threat ever to the U.S." -- most of this country would have understood and would have stood behind him no matter how long it took. I know I would have. But instead he used the war for his own personal war profiteering (and his Republican donors') and gave us lie after lie as the reason we needed to attack Iraq.

Too bad Bush was such a liar instead of just being up front about the very real and truthful fact that we -- not China -- need to get -- and keep -- control of Middle Eastern oil.

And please please tell me what the greater consequences of the democrats standing firm and forcing the republicans hands. Come on please tell me how this nation of people who over whelmingly support this wars end will be so damning for the party. Please, I want to hear this rhetorical conjecture that is not at all political partisan of any type of hacking.

Posted by moneywar at 2007-11-17 12:10 AM | Reply | Flag:

The Republicans in the Senate are blocking the Democrats from ending this war. That's all there is to it. Bush has his veto proof majority in the Senate and the Republicans and Lieberman are providing it, not the Democrats. Bush will never end this war because he has invested himself and what his tiny mind perceives as his legacy in it. He is a pigheaded and worthless fool who would rather pursue an unrealistic and unattainable validation of his own stupidity than stop the pointless further slaughter of Americans and Iraqis. He is a creature beyond contempt.

To repeat, the Republicans are responsible for prolonging this war. It will not stop until we have a Democrat in the White House. The majority of Americans support our troops by wanting to end Bush's pointless and mismanaged war. Bush, supported by the Senate Republicans, is stopping that from happening.

Murphy - I dont want to lose, heck Im a vet, but I also dont think bringing them home is a defeat. That fear mongoring rhetoric has come from the right not the left.

You cant lose something that cant be won. What is victory? Lets at least define it and make a clear roadmap towards that end.

You can not instill democracy by force. Forced altruism is just as wrong in foreign policy as it is with domestic policy. It is an oxymoron to liberate by force. Liberty can not be forced. What about MY liberty? Liberty from excessive taxation due to a misguided use of MY money.


Im not willing to pay for a 20 year war, in lives or taxes. My kids will thank me for the reduced federal burden. I would be dishonest if I railed against public assistance and other government spending and did not feel the same displeasure with wasting money in offensive military endeavors.

Id rather have my money than fight with some backward theologians under a imperialistic crusade to spread democracy.

"To repeat, the Republicans are responsible for prolonging this war. It will not stop until we have a Democrat in the White House." - Well not if Hillary is elected, she has said as long as 2011.

You want to end this...Ron Paul or Kucinich

"I sometimes think if Bush hadn't been such an arrogant liar and had just been honest with this country and said "If we don't get control of Iraq's oil then Communist China will and will use it to build the biggest military threat ever to the U.S." -- most of this country would have understood and would have stood behind him no matter how long it took. I know I would have."

Chris - this does not make sense, so you actually support the war in theory but in reality you oppose it over spite towards Bush for his lies?

Screw all the serious domestic issues as long as we end the Iraq war, right?

Are you saying congress can't walk down the street and chew gum at the same time?

To repeat, the Republicans are responsible for prolonging this war.

But apparently the Democrat majority can't force this issue because they will be viewed as prolonging the war........I see.....well reasoned out thought here.

As long as the Democrats do nothing it is the republicans fault, I see how it works. Do nothing but damn sure do collect a pay check.

Are you saying congress can't walk down the street and chew gum at the same time?


Posted by moneywar at 2007-11-17 12:44 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Im not willing to pay for a 20 year war, in lives or taxes."

Oops...too late. We're going to get the bill, whether we agree or not.

Oh, and we've yet to pay the first penny on the Iraq war. It's all been on the charge card.

What'd'ya think, America...have we gotten our money's worth? Will Boy George's Excellent Iraqi Adventure be worth all the lives and all the trillions?

"You really don't get that the obstructionist republicans will become even more obstructionist during this deadlock that you want so badly, do you?"

If the Dems capture the WH in '08 (possibly) , and increase their majorities in the House & Senate (undoubtedly), the only card in the Rs deck will be obstructionism.

Expect that to be their mantra beginning Jan 21, 2009.

Do nothing but damn sure do collect a pay check.

That's what A_Hole does all day! Can't we all?

CAPTOFACE

Chris - this does not make sense, so you actually support the war in theory but in reality you oppose it over spite towards Bush for his lies?

It's more complex than that. Yes, I hate Bush for the liar that he is. However, I'm a realist about the very real need for us -- not our potential biggest military threat down the road -- Communist China -- to have control over Middle Eastern oil. I think we could have done it in many other ways to guarantee our control over the oil besides an illegal war in Iraq. But Bush is not known for using diplomacy. Until we get alternative methods of energy we need oil. That's reality.

China is helping build those nuclear reactors in Iran. Hell, China is even driving us into bankruptcy by loaning Bush the billions he is using to profit from, and to fight, the war in Iraq. China's huge growth (and again you can thank Bush's free trade agenda for helping them achieve that) and the profits China is making from it are being funneled directly into enlarging and equiping the Chinese military.

It's a rotten situation that Bush created in Iraq and I think if he had worked in a diplomatic manner with Saddam instead of economic sanctions that drove that country into poverty we could have made a rock solid oil deal that the U.S. would be the ones to benefit from Iraq's oil reserves and not Communist China. I want our guys home but if we do then does it open the door for Communist China to gain control of ME oil?

To be honest it's hard to say. I hate this war and it's been run so badly and so ineptly and so greedily that Bush deserves impeachment for that alone. The way he has handled Iraq from start to finish is criminally negligent.

In the end I figure the U.S. will hunker down in its Embassy, have a few thousand of our troops permanently stationed in Iraq to guard the Embassy and the oil reserves we will control and we will let the rest of Iraq self-implode. Sad ending but that's what I see happening and it's a disgrace what we have done to the Iraqi people.

correction "equiping" should be "equipping"

Communist China -- to have control over Middle Eastern oil. I think we could have done it in many other ways to guarantee our control over the oil besides an illegal war in Iraq.

Wow! As long as I can remember and have been taught since a very very young child, if it is not mine I have no rights to it.

Apparently our nations has not progressed far enough to understand this 4 year old teaching.

Hell, China is even driving us into bankruptcy

Yes, China is doing this, it is all their fault. Apparently this country has a problem with accepting responsibility too, something taught when I was also a child.

Apparently our nations has not progressed far enough to understand this 4 year old teaching.

Nor do 4 YOs understand the complexities of geopolitics. One day the oil on this planet, like a drying up waterhole in the desert, will be coveted by many nations. Right or wrong, nation with the most influence on the oil producing nation will be the benefactor.

In this day and age, only a 4 YO would be so naive as to think if it is not mine I have no rights to it and that's the way it is. Period. CC is right

The mental midget speaks about justifiable dictatorship thieving.

See those who have moved beyond the 4 year old thoughts know that making and producing something new will reduce having the influence of an uncontrollable. That is what adults do, not steal their neighbors TV.

Talk about naive. Even the very young still understand right and wrong.

The mental midget speaks about justifiable dictatorship thieving.

Your first retort to me starts with an insult. Just as trees said about on the other post -- that's about all you are good for. You just proved it.

Even the very young still understand right and wrong.

Yes they do. But only the ignorant think that right always prevails in the real world.

Go back to your "I love you, you love me, we're a happy family" world where everything comes up roses. Don't forget to strew childish insults along the way 4 year olds do.

Money

See those who have moved beyond the 4 year old thoughts know that making and producing something new will reduce having the influence of an uncontrollable...

I guess you missed this line in my answer above --

...Until we get alternative methods of energy we need oil. That's reality...."

Of course we need to cut our dependence on oil I never disagreed with that. But, in the meantime, do we let our very real potential future enemy (Communist China) get the upper hand? Are you willing to let China get control of the world's oil until we come up with alternative energy?

What do we do in the meantime? Sit back and turn over the world's oil reserves to a nation like Communist China who -- when the time comes -- won't give a second thought as to what military methods they would use to acquire the oil reserves of another country.

Are you willing to let China get control of the world's oil until we come up with alternative energy?


You must not have read moneywar's post, CC.

if it is not mine I have no rights to it.

Posted by moneywar at 2007-11-17 01:20 AM |

Your first retort to me starts with an insult. Just as trees said about on the other post -- that's about all you are good for. You just proved it.

Hmmm! Naive was not first?

Yes they do. But only the ignorant think that right always prevails in the real world.

It sounds as if a young person doesn't actually know what prevails true meaning means. If the TV is not mine I either buy my own or make my own, not steal my neighbors because I don't want to spend the money on its development.

This is common sense of right and wrong and if our leaders can't follow such basic teaching the example just follows down to our children.

It is so difficult in doing the right thing, apparently we need a new "no child left behind" program in our schools.

Yes, we have all witness China warring with nations like Iraq and occupying those countries all for the sake of controlling oil.

At least it is now getting acknowledged that oil control is the issue.

Hmmm! Naive was not first? (insult)


This is the only time I used the word "naive". I didn't realize you were 4 years old and you would think I was speaking directly to you.

and age, only a 4 YO would be so naive

Why am I wasting my time with a pre-schooler anyway.

Nighty, Night, little boy. It's probably way past your bedtime so I'll not encourage you anymore by replying to your posts tonight.

The poll numbers for Congress will drop again.
Reason-The Repugs are anti-American, anti-troop and again have thwarted the will of the American people.
We must make them pay in "08"

Repugs- No ideas, Nothing but Fear!!

"You really don't get that the obstructionist republicans will become even more obstructionist during this deadlock that you want so badly, do you?"

If the Dems capture the WH in '08 (possibly) , and increase their majorities in the House & Senate (undoubtedly), the only card in the Rs deck will be obstructionism.

Expect that to be their mantra beginning Jan 21, 2009.

Posted by Danforth at 2007-11-17 12:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

Chris,

Thanks for the link but still does nothing as to doing the right thing.

Oil is only an end game if one doesn't want to get out of the game.

Most children figure this out early in life.

The far left is as dangerous as the far right.

But apparently blindly accepting them doing nothing is preventing this from happening.

Yes, we have all witness China warring with nations like Iraq and occupying those countries all for the sake of controlling oil.

You really are a naive 4 year old, aren't you? Do you really think that a country that doesn't hesitate to run down thousands of its own people with tanks for speaking freely is going to passively sit by and watch their country go down the tubes economically for lack of oil? You really believe that?

That kool-aid they serve you in your preschool must be tasty stuff!

Who holds who's $ & for what future prize perhaps in this little chessgame?

Dare we mention Taiwan?

And the republicans think that that 11% rating is bad for the DEMS!!!!

I think they will be reevaluating their judgement when they are looking for jobs after the next election

"China's huge growth (and again you can thank Bush's free trade agenda for helping them achieve that) and the profits China is making from it are being funneled directly into enlarging and equiping the Chinese military."

-Just to be fair, Clinton was also a big supporter of this and the Dem candidates refused to denouce it during the debate.

"I think if he had worked in a diplomatic manner with Saddam instead of economic sanctions that drove that country into poverty we could have made a rock solid oil deal that the U.S. would be the ones to benefit from Iraq's oil reserves and not Communist China. " I guess OPEC would not object to lopsided oil deal in favor of the US? China would not feel provoked by such a deal?

"Do you really think that a country that doesn't hesitate to run down thousands of its own people with tanks for speaking freely is going to passively sit by and watch their country go down the tubes economically for lack of oil?"

I'm glad you still recognize the threat that China poses, so isn't it odd that we allow billions of dollars worth of goods to be imported from that nation??? While.....continuing to embargo Cuba???
New Farm Bill specifically forbids selling FOOD to Cuba! Our foreign policy under both REpublican and Democratic administrations has been too controlled by special interests instead of well thought out strategy. We should NOT be importing from China, we should treat that nation like any other, demand democratic reform or close our market to them. The only realy power we have to influence that country is access to our markets. It seems insane that we impoverish our country buying goods from China while at the same time we know that they are ruled by the Communist Party who will never willingly relinquish power and will become increasingly a dangerous force as their military grows with the financing supplied by our consumers.

DANNI - I cant believe it...I am in total agreement with you.

Danni -
"We should NOT be importing from China, we should treat that nation like any other, demand democratic reform or close our market to them"

I spoke to soon, I ALMOST totally agree with you. I disagree we must DEMAND another nation should do anyhing but I agree we can speak loadly with our economy. The biggest problem is the trade deal that is so lopsided toward China. Our market cant compete with slave labor and lax if any enviromental regulation. Obviosly we cant go to China's level to compete so we must require imports from China be regulated to the same standard we have in order to be imported. So I guess we pretty much agree.

Also, what the heck with Cuba. I think trade and communication would do more to encourage a revolution over Castro than any embargo ever could. Besides its obvious the embargo has not worked, all we have done is make the Cuban people suffer.

Should read -I disagree we must DEMAND another nation should have domocratic reform but I agree we can speak loadly with our economy. We can only spread liberty by example, we cant and should not force it.

crap - loadly = loudly

"How can you forget--give the nominee an up or down vote--the nu-cle-ar option talk and all."

The difference, the Dems eventually reached a compromise. The Repubs just seem intent on being an obstruction to the will of the majority of American people on the issue of Iraq.

DANNI - I cant believe it...I am in total agreement with you.

re china: ditto

Money,

"As long as I can remember and have been taught since a very very young child, if it is not mine I have no rights to it."

That is a mighty conservative thing to be saying.....If only one of the political parties would adopt that philosophy and use it as a basis for HEALTH CARE reform, and TAX REFORM I may have found a political party I could more comfortably call home! But since the Hildebeast wants to "take those profits and reinvest them" because she "knows more about what I need than I do" and then expects me to pay for "universal health care" I can see the Moveon.orgers are no closer than the republicans are to learning that lesson.

I'm actually starting to feel a bit sorry for you Democratics. Here you are being made into a whining pack of traitors, in order to gain partisan political power for just your gang of Americans -- the Hip Hop party of subversion.

You all are literally following the orders of Osama bin Laden! "Step up the attack on Bush, and fulfill your promise to withdraw from Iraq!"

All of Islam is cheering for you to leave in defeat and allow al Qaeda and other terrorist factions to rule in Iraq.

Then, it won't be long before they have the UN on the run in Afghanistan ... you petty traitors will enjoy that ... you can spend more money on queer marriage and more abortions for the masses ...

Squirming, verminous collective of the People's Progressive Party in support of human sacrifice, while you increase your party pogrom against Christianity ...

"DUMP CHRISTMAS! NO MORE TYRANNY FROM THE RELIGION OF EVIL TREES! DOWN WITH NASCAR TRAILER TRASH NEOCONS! LIEBERMAN IS THE TRAITOR NOT US!""

TADOWE, my old friend.

I thought they let you go home on weekends.

NURSE !! 10 CC's of Thorazine to TADOWE's room .. STAT !!

PS TadWOE

I called my German Aunt and my German best friend.

You're WRONG as was proven over and over and over.

"Hail Victory" it is

The Repubs just seem intent on being an obstruction to the will of the majority of American people on the issue of Iraq.

Posted by johnny_hotsauce


This is my favorite argument. Is this the same majority of Americans who wanted us to go into Iraq? Is this the same majority of Americans who believed Saddam was connected to 911?

How about the majority of Americans who want tighter restrictions on abortion?

Or

The majority of Americans who are against gay marriage.

Or does the will of the people only matter when it comes to Iraq?

"How about the majority of Americans who want tighter restrictions on abortion?"

They do? Link, please.

"The majority of Americans who are against gay marriage."

This is my favorite argument. Is this the same majority of Americans who wanted us to go into Iraq? Is this the same majority of Americans who believed Saddam was connected to 911?



Of course it is!

A majority based on what facts aside from your intense desire.

As well who connected Saddam and 911, well that would be Bush Cheney but thanks for playing.

"How about the majority of Americans who want tighter restrictions on abortion?"

They do? Link, please.
POSTED BY HANS


Link, he doesn't need no stinking link. Hearsay and listening to his own side tone works just fine.

"Link, he doesn't need no stinking link. Hearsay and listening to his own side tone works just fine."

You're right, Zap.

It was foolish of me to even ask.

Hans

I would rather not turn this thread into an abortion debate, my point was that basing ones policy off of polls is not a good way to govern in my opinion. But if you are going to trumpet the will of the people on one issue, then shouldn't you do it on all issues? Maybe we should just abandon the current form of government, and allow an "official polling" institute to run the country.

How about the majority of Americans who want tighter restrictions on abortion?

I think you would have to narrow down what you mean when you say "abortion" to include the circumstances.

Rape, incest, mothers life in danger etc... and distinguish those circumstances from others.

Or are you simply referring to late-term abortions?

- In 1948, about 90% of American Adults opposed interracial marriage when the Supreme Court of California legalized it, and California became the first state that allowed loving, committed interracial couples to marry.
- In 1967, about 72% were opposed to interracial marriage. This was the year when the U.S. Supreme Court was legalized interracial marriage everywhere in the U.S. 14
- In 1991, those adults opposed to interracial marriage became a minority for the first time.
- The change averaged slightly less than 1 percentage point per year.

Source

Hans



Funny I just read my original post, nothing in there about interracial marriage. But if you point is that like interracial marriage, people will eventually be ok with gay marriage, I probably will agree with you.

"I could go on."

Go on? You need to start:

How about the majority of Americans who want tighter restrictions on abortion?

Because most American really believe that abortion should be legal for three reasons: rape, incest and me.

Hans

My bad. you already addressed it.

"But if you point is that like interracial marriage, people will eventually be ok with gay marriage, I probably will agree with you."

Bingo!

Hans

77% favor permitting a woman who wants to have an abortion in all and some circumstances.
Posted by Hans


So what is the percentage of people who are for abortion in ALL circumstances? percentage for people who are for abortion in SOME circumstances?

"Do you think abortion should be legal in all cases, legal in most cases, illegal in most cases, or illegal in all cases?"


23% legal in ALL cases
34% legal in MOST cases
28% illegal in MOST cases

ABC News/Washington Post Poll. July 18-21, 2007.

I gotta go,


It's to nice of a day to be wasting it on the computer.......

You guys have a good day!

I think you missed my point Zap, or maybe I didn't state it very well. Pretty much every poll on the link I provided showed that the majority of Americans agree with abortions in MOST cases. Not ALL CASES. Unless I am wrong, there are no restrictions on abortion at this current time. (Not including Late Term Abortions)

We can do this all day long. You can find polls that agree with you! I can find polls that agree with me! Here lies the problem with polls. My original post, before we got off on this tangent is that governing by polls is not effective, in my opinion.

Have a good day!

I can find polls that agree with me
POSTED BY MADE_IN_USA

Indeed as I think some of your numbers came from fox. I was looking neutral.

Again, post "links" as in Hyperlinks. If you're claiming them something as fact post the Hyperlink. It adds credibility.

If you don't know how drop me a line and I give you a step by step.

Enjoy your day!

Unless I am wrong, there are no restrictions on abortion at this current time.

You are stunningly wrong.

Republicans just voted for more death.Republicans want us dead for oil

The only realy power we have to influence that country is access to our markets. It seems insane that we impoverish our country buying goods from China while at the same time we know that they are ruled by the Communist Party who will never willingly relinquish power and will become increasingly a dangerous force as their military grows with the financing supplied by our consumers.
DANNI

DANNI, who actually profits from this interaction?
International globalist corporations, and their CEO's, stockholders?
I'm being serious, as I do not know.
I would assume that this is who is reaping profits from our "Made In China" dilemma.