The Iraq Supplemental Funding Debate

Update [2007-3-22 16:21:27 by Big Tent Democrat]:Procedural vote passes with 224 votes. 1 GOP vote, Walter Jones presumably. More debate and the big vote tomorrow.

Open Thread. I'll be updating with my observations, which as always, are attributable only to me. You can follow along on c-span or at the c-span website.

Louise Slaughter, voting Yes, (D-NY) says "this its the first time Democrats get the chance to change the course of the war and we will do it."

Not with this bill you are not Representative. You talk a good game but push came to shove and you balked at standing for ending the war. You are supporting staying the course for all practical purposes. Your changes are unenforceable. Your withdrawal deadliine a sham. You have not honored your word on this.

Jim McGovern (D-MA), voting Yes, calls this a difficult day. I ask why? HE decides to talk about his bill calling for immediate withdrawal. HE says that unfortunately, people do not agree with him.

He says that passing this bill "sends a message to Bush and Cheney. Then he says we can't trust them. HE says defeating the bill leads to more of the same.

Excuse me, IT IS more of the same. Your protest that it is not the bill you want rings hollow. 218 votes? Real and menaningful deadlines? What empty words from McGovern. I would prefer none of his posturing about how bas the bill is but "it is the best we can do, for now." There will be no better bill later. This is it McGovern. This is the baseline. You voted for this crap now. You will now vote for again and again and again.

Just plain stupid.

Alcee Hastings (D-FL), voting yes. Voted against the war. We all support the troops. Rattles on about body armor, and troop readiness. Dems are for them. Bush against.

"This bill is not the end all be all for getting us out of IRaq. This is the first step."

No kidding Representative. This is not a first step and it helps not one whit for the next step. I wish these Representatives would explain how this bill is a step for anything? This "debate" is a joke.

Rep. Matsui (D-CA), voting YEs. - "Bill is not perfect but deserves ourt support because it offers the best chance to change course."

Why is that Congresswoman? Saying it don't make it so. In fact, it is just the opposite. She wants better she said. But this is the best we can do. Butg this stinks. It does not help. Will someone explain why this works? The Congresswoman claims this fixes a firm timetable. It pretends to . It does not. She then says that defeating this bill will cause a blank check to come after.

WHY?????? Why would the Democratic leadership put forward such a bill? The Congresswoman indicts the Dem leadership by basically alleging they will cave in to Bush. I would like to think better of them than that. But you know them better apparently Congresswoman. They are craven and spineless is your argument uin favor of this bill. How very nice.

Dennis Cardoza (D-CA), voting yes. The typical blah blah.

Peter Welch (D-VT), voting Yes. The same old. If I could write the bill I would . . . yadda yadda. Does it impose accountability, does it give a blank check. etc.

Same false nonsense that this bill does anything. Just lip service from him. He says it is not. It is. Every speech the same. Come September 2008, the truth will be seen.

From now on, "blah blah" means the typical "progressive" "IF I was writing the bill we would end the war today" nonsense.

Kathy Castor (D-FL), voting Yes. Would not write a better bill. She likes this one. Good for her. ASt loeast an honest supporter of the bill. I can respect that more than the "I would write a better bill crowd."

Dan Lungren (R-CA) is right. Put the question on ending the war to the table, not a bad politcal posture of a bill.

Carol Shea-Porter D-NH, Yes. She boohooed because her constitutents are not happy that she is voting for continuing the war. I expect a "blah blah" from her. Actually not even that. BAscially a false statement that Congress "will use the power of the purse," not in this bill Congresswoman.

Bill Pascrell (D- NJ), Yes. Makes a good point, supplemental due to Bush failures. But then asks a question best directed at him - "why are you carrying Bush's water?"

The same line about this bill ending the war. Again, it won't.

< Dear Tony Snow, James Madison Left You This Note | The Iraq Supplemental Funding Debate Thread 2 >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    damn. (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by selise on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 02:02:15 PM EST
    my rep - jim  mcgovern - is going to vote to support the supplemental.


    Time to draw conclusions (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by Andreas on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:44:51 PM EST
    You should finally draw some political conclusions. The Democratic Party is in the same camp as the Republican Party. There is no essential difference between the two.

    The leadership (none / 0) (#31)
    by Edger on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 04:35:16 PM EST
    Not the whole party.

    The list of those OPPOSED is growing (5.00 / 5) (#3)
    by leoncarre on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 02:10:15 PM EST

    Rep. Barbara Lee


    Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald (leaning No, Politico, told Ann Wright 3/22 she will vote No
    Rep. Dennis Kucinich (no, solidly confirmed)
    Rep. Barbara Lee (no, solidly confirmed)
    Rep. Maxine Waters (no, solidly confirmed)
    Rep. Lynn Woolsey (no, solidly confirmed)
    Rep. John Lewis (via comments, may vote "Present," Politico, given Backbone Award for commitment to vote No)
    Rep. Diane Watson (The Hill, Politico says she supports Lee amendment, but that doesn't tell us how she will vote on supplemental; more comments indicate she's a definite No)
    Rep. Pete Stark (The Hill, Politico, telling people he's undecided, told media he'll vote No, told Jodie Evans 3/22 he'll vote No)

    Rep. Yvette Clarke (undecided but leaning No, Politico, also told Tina Richards she's leaning No, also backed Lee Amendment)
    Rep. Charles Rangel (via comments)
    Rep. Keith Ellison (leaning: The Hill, leaning No Politico, telling people he's undecided)
    Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (The Hill, leaning No Politico)
    Rep. Edolphus Towns (The Hill, says he supports Lee's amendment but that doesn't tell us how he'll vote on supplemental)
    Rep. Al Wynn (wavering after promising to vote against given serious 2006 peace candidate challenge by Donna Edwards)
    Rep. Steve Cohen (The Hill, leaning No Politico)
    Rep. Lloyd Doggett (via Sheila Jackson Lee)
    Rep. Raul Grijalva (only leaning no according to Politico, gave Tina Richards impression he'll vote no)

    Rep. Dan Boren (leaning No, The Hill, says will vote no unless there's a timeline but some are claiming Pelosi's bill counts as having a timeline, may actually be opposed to even a toothless timeline)
    Rep. Jim Marshall (Politico, refuses to tell people how he will vote)

    Rep. Ron Paul

    (source: afterdowningstreet.org call-in campaign)

    I'll take voting no for the wrong reasons... (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by cal11 voter on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:10:10 PM EST
    over voting yes for the wrong reasons.  The Dem leadership should start over.

    blogger land update... (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by selise on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 02:39:15 PM EST
    howie at downwithtryanny is now saying he supports the bill - after strongly coming out against it. wtf?

    But when the supplemental bill comes up, the progressive vote must be a "yes" one.

    the power of persuasion (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by leoncarre on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 02:51:58 PM EST
    he took sirota's post on why progressives must vote yes at face value.  

    just get something printed at Huff Post, epluribus media, American Chronicle, and a blog entry becomes News indexed by Google.

    Once it become News, then all questioning ends... it just must be so.

    so this is pretty easy, on the list of the Out of Iraq Bloggers Caucus, delete one entry... this is called flip-flopping.  no big deal.


    correction!!! (none / 0) (#33)
    by selise on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 04:42:52 PM EST
    please see my correction!

    Who cares (none / 0) (#8)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 02:42:37 PM EST
    IF there is no asrgument, it is just nonsense to be ignored.

    I'll listen to arguments, not pronouncements.


    there was an arguement... (none / 0) (#10)
    by selise on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 02:48:48 PM EST
    there was an arguement... well, sorta - not a very good one (imo), and i don't buy it.

    i just quoted the conclusion.

    and i do care what anti-war bloggers are saying... howie carries alot of weight - he helped raise a ton of money for anti-war candidates (and dropped brown when he voted for the MCA).


    Sirota says so (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:05:04 PM EST
    and I trust him implicitly is NOT an argument.

    from now on (4.50 / 4) (#13)
    by leoncarre on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:05:16 PM EST
    from now on the only kind of person who carries a lot of weight in my world is the person who thinks for themselves...

    after watching the weight being thrown around by the democrats with power who want this bill passed, pressuring and threatening those who will vote against it, i am only impressed by those who will stand for the courage of their convictions

    i just don't give a damn for money, influence, power, weight... and credentials, and standing under the anti-war banner... look at MoveOn fer crissake...

    the only person i admire in this mess of a bill is Congresswoman Barbara Lee who had the courage to stand alone, and then those people who will stand with her... even if it means losing money for their states, even if it means loss of seats on important committees.

    and there's a few other people of principle i admire... foremost for their ability to reason and to see through all the smoke and rhetoric being blown around by some "democratic pundits"...  those who are blowing smoke to disguise the fact that they never read the legislation being voted on


    Think and present (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:07:32 PM EST
    or at least ADOPT and say why for themselves.

    "I trust him implicitly" is nonsense.

    Russ Feingold voted for Roberts.

    I bashed him for it. Because it was wrong.


    exactamente (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by leoncarre on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:10:57 PM EST
    think and present
    adopt and say why
    good qualities for any representative

    "vote for this bill or hand the victory to Bush"... elected democratic leaders are saying this listening to this???

    in the end that money for spinach starts to look pretty attractive, eh what?


    Well (none / 0) (#14)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:06:08 PM EST
    I don't care if it is Kos himself, no argument, not important to me.

    correction!!! (none / 0) (#34)
    by selise on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 04:43:43 PM EST
    please see my correction!

    CORRECTION!!! (none / 0) (#32)
    by selise on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 04:40:39 PM EST
    howie has informed me (in comments to his post linked above) that i misunderstood his post and that he is still against the supplemental funding bill.

    please don't let my stupidity influence your good opinion of howie.


    De Fazio D Oregon (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by leoncarre on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 02:43:08 PM EST
    Afghanistan was a legitimate war, where we should have stayed focussed.

    Iraqis have to want the end of the war... this bill gives them that motivation.

    He's voting yes.

    What's wrong with this picture? (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by leoncarre on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:20:02 PM EST
    For an additional amount for `Iraq Freedom Fund', $155,600,000, to remain available for transfer until September 30, 2008: Provided, That the amount provided under this heading is designated as making appropriations for contingency operations directly related to the global war on terrorism, and other unanticipated defense-related operations, pursuant to section 402 of H. Con. Res. 376 (109th Congress), as made applicable to the House of Representatives by section 511(a)(4) of H. Res. 6 (110th Congress).

    Snort (none / 0) (#25)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:30:28 PM EST
    What a joke.

    the joke is (none / 0) (#29)
    by leoncarre on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:47:57 PM EST
    that we have been discussing this for months and hardly a person has read it, and that includes members of congress

    Congressman John Conyers (D-MI)
    "Sit down, my son. We don't read most of the bills. Do you really know what would entail if we were to read every bill that we pass?"

    Caruso Sings Pagliaci


    what a disgrace (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by conchita on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:21:40 PM EST
    also, realized this morning that i had never seen the actual bill.  no one has referenced it.  i didn't even know the number associated with it.  wonder if they were keeping it under wraps until the vote?  wonder if these guys have all read it.

    HR 545 (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:29:42 PM EST
    You'll see the final version tomorrow.

    it was never under wraps (none / 0) (#30)
    by leoncarre on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:49:57 PM EST
    If I ever thought Iraq was a clusterf@$% (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:36:16 PM EST
    I would have to say that the House is trying to beat that out as a larger clusterf@$% and we are supposed to be the government that Iraqi's would want to aspire to........spare me.  Time for a glass of wine.  What a pathetic show!

    Right now (none / 0) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 02:12:31 PM EST
    I am concerned wioth defeating this bill.

    Can you focus on the matter at hand or are you more interested in name calling?

    Pete Welch D Vermont (none / 0) (#5)
    by leoncarre on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 02:25:28 PM EST
    No date certain for withdrawal

    But he's supporting the bill because it "puts us on the path."

    I protested yesterday at Welch' s office (5.00 / 3) (#16)
    by dutchfox on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:07:44 PM EST
    in Burlington, and he got on the speaker phone and gave a lot of bull; he was undecided, but definitely was leaning to a yes vote. About 30 of us sat in his office. He did not listen to the people, most of whom there had voted for him. He campaigned in '06 on being anti-war, but I'm  sorry - if he votes for this bill, he is not anti-war. 6 of the protesters were arrested around 7 pm last night. Welch asked the Burlington chief of police to drop the charges

    Burlington Free Press story


    Power (none / 0) (#6)
    by HeadScratcher on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 02:26:33 PM EST
    Progressives thought they had it after the last election. Pelosi and Hoyer are showing they don't.

    Cardoza is a Blue Dog and represents... (none / 0) (#19)
    by cal11 voter on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:16:21 PM EST
    a generally conservative electorate.  But the Dem voters that would account for the margin of victory in a close race are more liberal than Cardoza is as a whole.  But, on the bright side, he is siding with the Dem leadership and not the Blue Dogs.  I think he'd go with the Dem leadership whichever direction it heads.

    The leadership (none / 0) (#20)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:17:53 PM EST
    has adopted the Blue Dog position. I do not see your pooint.

    Many Blue Dogs would have followed the Dem... (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by cal11 voter on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:28:55 PM EST
    leadership had they not adopted the preconditions of some Blue Dogs IMHO.  I think Cardoza would have been one of them.  And he would do so if the Dem leadership started over IMHO.

    EXACTLY! (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 03:31:05 PM EST
    That is the exact point of our objection.

    A modest proposal (none / 0) (#35)
    by Sailor on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 05:42:04 PM EST
    Screw all this talk about benchmarks and funding. Hold bush to his word: "We'll leave Iraq if asked."

    Let's ask the iraqis who now have 'freedom and democracy', voting, purple fingers and a constitution. Let them vote on whether the US should stay.

    Iraqis told them to go from day one (none / 0) (#36)
    by dutchfox on Thu Mar 22, 2007 at 06:04:17 PM EST