| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq |
| Senate Thumps Kerry's Pullout Proposal |
| 2006-06-15 |
| The Senate overwhelmingly rejected a call this afternoon for withdrawal of most American combat troops from Iraq by the end of the year as the debate in both houses of Congress mixed high emotion with calculated maneuvering.The 93-to-6 vote came after a maneuver by Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the second-ranking Republican, who introduced a measure that he said was taken from a proposal by Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, calling for President Bush to agree with the new Iraqi government on a timetable to withdraw most troops by Dec. 31. Mr. Kerry has not yet offered his own measure because, he said, language is still being worked out. He and other Democrats accused Republicans of gamesmanship by engineering a surprise vote today, according to The Associated Press, and said they would push for an authentic debate next week. The vote today was to table a proposal that only those forces essential to completing the mission of "standing up" the Iraqi security forces remain in the country in 2007, and it reflected a deep reluctance in both parties to commit to a firm withdrawal schedule. The six "no" votes were cast by Senators Kerry and Edward M. Kennedy, also of Massachusetts; Russell D. Feingold of Wisconsin, Barbara Boxer of California, Tom Harkin of Iowa and Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia, all Democrats. |
| Posted by:Captain America |
| #8 "The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last four years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for four years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation."--Oct. 9, 2002 "Yea."--vote on authorizing military force to liberate Iraq, Oct. 12, 2002 "Even having botched the diplomacy, it is the duty of any president, in the final analysis, to defend this nation and dispel the security threat. . . . Saddam Hussein has brought military action upon himself by refusing for 12 years to comply with the mandates of the United Nations."--March 18, 2003 "The vote is the vote. I voted to authorize. It was the right vote, and the reason I mentioned the threat is that we gave the--we had to give life to the threat. If there wasn't a legitimate threat, Saddam Hussein was not going to allow inspectors in. Now, let me make two points if I may. Ed [Gordon] questioned my answer. The reason I can't tell you to a certainty whether the president misled us is because I don't have any clue what he really knew about it, or whether he was just reading what was put in front of him. And I have no knowledge whether or not this president was in depth--I just don't know that. And that's an honest answer, and there are serious suspicions about the level to which this president really was involved in asking the questions that he should've. With respect to the question of, you know, the vote--let's remember where we were. If there hadn't been a vote, we would never have had inspectors. And if we hadn't voted the way we voted, we would not have been able to have a chance of going to the United Nations and stopping the president, in effect, who already had the votes, and who was obviously asking serious questions about whether or not the Congress was going to be there to enforce the effort to create a threat. So I think we did the right thing. I'm convinced we did."--Sept. 9, 2003 "Nay."--vote on $87 billion to fund operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, Oct. 17, 2003 "I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it."--March 16, 2004 "The president made a mistake in invading Iraq."--Sept. 30, 2004 "No."--answer to Jim Lehrer's question "Are Americans now dying in Iraq for a mistake?," Sept. 30, 2004 " I was wrong to vote for that Iraqi resolution."--June 13, 2006 No wonder Kerry says you can't have it both ways--as nuanced as he is, he's had it at least half a dozen ways! |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-06-15 22:09 |
| #7 buncha cunning runts, are they, AP? |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-06-15 21:44 |
| #6 Kerry is working out the language for a more nuanced resolution, ya see. Lingusitically cunning, ya see. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2006-06-15 21:32 |
| #5 I'm guessing he voted for the resolution before he voted against it. Dimwit. He thinks not supporting the mission and the troops is going to garner him support with the MM and the dhimmies. |
| Posted by: FOTSGreg 2006-06-15 18:46 |
| #4 Kerry is a legend in his own mind. |
| Posted by: doc 2006-06-15 18:07 |
| #3 Kerry voted for a pullout. He will vote for a pullout again. He's trying to build up street cred as being consistantly against the war. By the time the 2008 elections roll around the troops will mostly have been withdrawn (as their mission is done) and Kerry will position himself as the reason the troops were brought home. This againt Hillary who will be in record as voting twice to keep the troops in Iraq. I'm not saying Kerry planned this vote, but it does work in his favor. Of course all of this is balanced by the fact that he's a loser candidate with little chance of getting the Dem nod a second time no matter what he does (short of his wife paying off voters in a dozen primary states). |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2006-06-15 18:06 |
| #2 Mr. Kerry has not yet offered his own measure because, he said, language is still being worked out. Gettin ready, to get started on this thing, soon as I can find a steady wind. |
| Posted by: 6 2006-06-15 17:32 |
| #1 Good ole Babs! Can always count on her to be on the wrong side of history. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2006-06-15 17:05 |