Steve's Thoughts

Waxman's ‘1984' Law Would Impede Citizen Lobbying<br><br>

Read the rest of this entry ... (1324 words left)

They loaded it up with "pork", and Pelosi just did this to make Bush look bad if he vetos the legislation, and Pelosi wants Code Pink to stop camping on her doorstep.
Steve

Read the rest of this entry ... (758 words left)

Read the rest of this entry ... (278 words left)

You lose this one Surrender Monkeys!!!!

Steve

WASHINGTON —  Republicans handed Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid a defeat on the Iraq issue Thursday, voting down a proposal that would withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq by March 31, 2008.

The vote was 50-48 against the measure, 12 short of the 60 needed for passage.

Democrats aggressively challenged President Bush's Iraq policy at both ends of the Capitol building, gaining House committee approval for a troop withdrawal deadline of Sept. 1, 2008, but suffering defeat in the Senate.

Anti-war Democrats prevailed on a near-party line vote of 36-28 in the House Appropriations Committee, brushing aside a week-old veto threat and overcoming unyielding opposition from Republicans.

"I want this war to end. I don't want to go to any more funerals," said New York Rep. Jose Serrano, one of several liberal Democrats who have pledged their support for the legislation despite preferring a faster end to the war.

"Nobody wants our troops out of Iraq more than I do, countered Rep. C.W. Bill Young a Republican, who sought unsuccessfully to scuttle the timeline for a troop withdrawal. "But we can't afford to turn over Iraq to Al Qaeda."

In the Senate, after weeks of skirmishing, Republicans easily turned back Democratic legislation requiring a troop withdrawal to begin within 120 days. The measure set no fixed deadline for completion of the redeployment, but set a goal of March 31, 2008. The Iraq debate spilled over to the 2008 campaign for the White House.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, a Democratic presidential candidate, said in a New York Times interview that if elected she would maintain a scaled-down American military force in Iraq that would stay off the streets in Baghdad and no longer would try to protect Iraqis from sectarian violence.

She cited "remaining vital national security interests" for a continued deployment of U.S. troops in Iraq aimed at fighting al-Qaida, deterring Iran, protecting Kurds and possibly supporting the Iraqi military, the newspaper reported Wednesday night on its Web site.

She said her plan was consistent with the Senate resolution, saying it called for "a limited number" of troops to stay in Iraq to protect the U.S. Embassy and other personnel, train and equip Iraqi forces and conduct "targeted counterterrorism operations."

While the House bill is unlikely to sail through unchecked, Democrats say its passage — even if by a slim majority — would be a loud message to the president to end the war. Pelosi was trying to line up votes from party liberals who want troops out of Iraq sooner than the 2008 deadline, as well as more conservative Democrats who are concerned the bill would micromanage the war.

A total of 10 peaceful anti-war protesters were arrested, both inside the committee room and outside the building where the debate was unfolding.

Sgt. Kimberly Schneider of the Capitol Police said they would be charged with unlawful assembly and disorderly conduct. "They were being loud and boisterous. They were told to stop and they didn't so they were arrested," she said.

The Defeatocrat wing of the Democratic Party vehemently opposes John Murtha's "Slow Bleed" Plan, saying that it isn’t defeatist enough. Here’s what the Politico is reporting:

Read the rest of this entry ... (741 words left)