Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Vote for Iraq Troop Pullout Tonight? (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Vote for Iraq Troop Pullout Tonight?
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Okay, so I'm seeing headlines reporting that there is going to be a vote on whether to pull troops out of Iraq. Anyone: confirm or deny?
Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Link that doesn't quite go that far....
Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Is it that no one cares that Congress may be voting to pull out our troops tonight, or that the reports are wrong, or what?
Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Digger
Member
Member # 2341

 - posted      Profile for Digger   Email Digger   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The reports are accurate, but this came up so fast I didn't notice it until you posted: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051118/ap_on_go_co/congress_iraq

But this push for a vote is coming from the Republicans. They are calling Murtha's bluff and trying to force Democrats to go on the record regarding their stance on Iraq. If the Democrats balk at voting, it will be a telling sign that the Republicans will exploit. If the vote goes through, whichever way the Democrats vote is going to cause them some problems.

Posts: 1317 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Redskullvw
Member
Member # 188

 - posted      Profile for Redskullvw   Email Redskullvw   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
How to turn Iraq into Vietnam?

In 1973-75 Democrats drummed up the evil secretive Republicans and the seemingly long time it was taking to assure a stable South Vietnamese Army and police force. They basicly said "Nixon, either you get those worthless gooks to do their own defense work, or we will totally scrap the entire military budget, and gut you in domesticve politics." So Kissenger declared that we would turn to Vietnemazation, and withdraw on a timetable. The Democrats declared the war lost, and watched over a million people loose any sembelence of freedom.

Fast forward. 2003-05 Democrats drummed up the evil secretive Republicans and the seemingly long time it was taking to assure a stable Iraqi Army and police force. They basicly said "Bush either you get those worthless ragheads to do their own defense work, or we will totally scrap the entire military budget, and gut you in domestice politics."

For those of you too young to have experienced history repeating itself before, take it from me this is the same thing all over again. History shows two things. One, we lost Vietnam due to domestic politics at home. Two, when Congress or the President pressume to run the day to day minutia of a war, the results are always bad.

Posts: 6333 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Everard
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We were losing the war in vietnam well before 1973, Greg.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I couldn't find any info, other than the link. I have no real opinion on the matter. It is clearly politically motivated, but I don't know why the Democrats are so upset. They could just calmly vote down the proposal, and call it reckless, which it surely would have been.

This is only part of a growing issue, both parties are going to fight to be perceived as the one that brought our troops home.

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Everard
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
" They could just calmly vote down the proposal, and call it reckless, which it surely would have been."

And, politically, what do you think would happen to a democrat who does this? He'd be branded a "war supporter," and get seriously damanged in the next election by republicans calling him either a flip flopper, hypocrit, or some other nonsense.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Digger
Member
Member # 2341

 - posted      Profile for Digger   Email Digger   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I do think there will be a concerted effort from both sides to get the majority of troops home by the end of '07 or early '08. The trick will be who gets the 'credit' ('credit' in this case being a very uncertain term depending on whether its really the right time to be bringing the troops out). The Democrats will try to make it appear they forced the hand of the Administration, while the Republicans will try to make it appear that it is part of a cohesive plan originating with the Iraqi government working together with US military leaders.

RS, I was just having the Vietnam conversation with a former coworker who is a retired Marine. He's really worried that we are going down the same path. I didn't have a lot of good news for him, except to say that I hoped at least some of us remember what happened and why and would do everything we could not to let it happen again. But, the parallels are starting to grow and my unease grows with them.

"We were losing the war in vietnam well before 1973, Greg."

If we were, I'd submit it had a lot to do with the politicization of the war, as Greg intimated. And that, too, has been happening with Iraq. This call for a vote being a good example.

"And, politically, what do you think would happen to a democrat who does this?"

That's why it's a good move by the Republicans - what to do if you're a Democrat? Evil warmonger or surrender monkey? Pick your poison and drink it deep.

Posts: 1317 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Everard
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We may have been losing the war for political reasons, but they aren't the political reasons that are typically suggested by republicans.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yes, he probably would be. It exposes Democrats to the reality that they do not agree with the large base of Americans who believe we should pull out immediately and unconditionally.

I don't use the H-Bomb, since I'm a signatory to the hypocrite non-proliferation treaty.

The sad part is, that most of these guys agree on a phased withdrawal following the final Iraqi elections in a month. But they are so wound up trying to gain political advantage, they're coming unhinged on both sides of the aisle.

Can we really be proud of the members of Congress who made these quotes?

From the Congressional record:

quote:
McDermott:

The White House has built an underground bunker to keep out reality. The truth cannot penetrate those walls of denial, fortified with Presidential speeches to carefully selected audiences. Now the President is beginning to say that he is not responsible for the war in Iraq . The record is clear, Mr. Speaker: this war was started by this President and his war cabinet. They got what they wanted. They got more than they can handle. And every new pronouncement from the White House bunker widens the gulf between administration rhetoric and Iraq reality.

Hmmm, yes I agree with you Mr. McDermott, by all means let's heed your call for less rhetoric.

quote:
Wilson:

However, since losing the 2004 election, Democrats have developed a disturbing case of obstructionism and now falsely claim that President Bush exaggerated the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. Why would Democrats go from agreeing with President Bush in supporting our mission in Iraq to slandering our Commander in Chief and questioning our troops' efforts? Politics, pure and simple politics.

In conclusion, God bless our troops, and we will never forget September 11.

Well, Mr. Wilson won't stop the rhetoric. Anyone?

What about Murtha? We'll have to wait, since the record for yesterday and today are not yet complete.

Is there anyone left in the Capitol who can say something sensible?

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
All this really leads me to only one conclusion: as long as we have an overwhelmingly Liberal Democrat supportive media, we can NEVER go to war with a united front and the necessary will to achieve total victory as long as it is a Republican President in office leading the effort.
Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kent
Member
Member # 832

 - posted      Profile for Kent   Email Kent   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Everard, we were absolutely winning Vietnam until we lost our will to fight it. You are perpetuating a lie.

Michael Medved designated the "three big lies" that continue to poison our understanding and analysis of the war, arguing against common contentions: 1. That the Vietnam War represented an unconstitutional conflict based upon American imperialism and a desire for world dominance 2. That the military lost the war on the battlefield, and in the process committed horrendous atrocities 3. That anti-war protestors became the true heroes of that turbulent era, and their efforts ultimately brought peace to both the US and Indochina.

Each of these three claims is a lie and a slander on America and her military.

Linky on Vietnam vs. Iraq

[ November 18, 2005, 07:31 PM: Message edited by: Kent ]

Posts: 1434 | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JoshuaD
Member
Member # 1420

 - posted      Profile for JoshuaD   Email JoshuaD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Alright, I hate on the liberals screwing up good war efforts as much as the next conservative, but lets be reasonable.

The last war we were really united behind was WWII. The good old days of war. Do you know why we were all united in that effort? Because Hitler was an undeniably evil mother****er.

I'm not too familiar with the criticism (or lack of) for the coldwar, but I'm certain that if it went hot, there would have been huge media backlashes... that is assuming there was still a media after the nukes.

My point is, the enemy of your enemy is your friend. EVERYONE hated Hitler in America, it was easy for us to unite behind that war. We can't expect that sort of support for these sorts of "long run descision" wars.

That said, I can understand what the republicans are thinking, but I don't like the game they're playing on principle.

Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
David Ricardo
Member
Member # 1678

 - posted      Profile for David Ricardo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
In the midst of the House debate on the fake Republican version of Jack Murtha's withdrawal resolution, the Republicans revealed their true nature again.

Money quote from Jean Schmidt(R), Represenative from Ohio (as she smears Jack Murtha as a coward on the floor of the U.S. Congress:

(While speaking of a phone call she received from a Marine colonel, and clearly throwing a low blow at Jack Murtha's courage)

quote:
Schmidt: "He asked me to send Congress a message - stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message - that cowards cut and run, Marines never do," Schmidt said.
Just FYI, Jack Murtha served 37 years in the Marine Corps and has earned several Purple Hearts. Every week, he visits our wounded heroes at Walter Reed. He has even been rewarded with the Semper Fidelis Award by the Marine Corps Foundation, which is the highest honor for a Marine.

This is the Republican Party of today -- a bunch of chickenhawks who took as many deferments as possible to escape from serving our country in Vietnam, yet they malign true American heroes who have already bled for this country back when those chickenhawks were too scared to do so. Pathetic.

If they really wanted to shoot down Murtha's resolution on its merits, they should have just held a vote on the Murtha resolution -- not this fake Republican excuse for a withdrawal resolution.

[ November 18, 2005, 07:31 PM: Message edited by: David Ricardo ]

Posts: 1429 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
David Ricardo
Member
Member # 1678

 - posted      Profile for David Ricardo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
As for the actual vote, there is a definite difference between the detailed six-month phased withdrawal that Jack Murtha is supporting -- and the ridiculous strawn man "immediate withdrawal" resolutuion that the Republicans are pushing.

Now, I happen to believe that Jack Murtha is wrong for supporting a phased withdrawal, but it still does not excuse the chickenhawk scum within the Republican Party to call him a coward on the floor of the U.S. Congress.

Posts: 1429 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Digger
Member
Member # 2341

 - posted      Profile for Digger   Email Digger   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"This is the Republican Party of today -- a bunch of chickenhawks who took as many deferments as possible to escape from serving our country in Vietnam, yet they malign true American heroes who have already bled for this country."

I'll put the former Marine Colonel I talked with yesterday up against Murtha. He isn't as decorated, but he was part of the astronaut program at a time when we weren't flying any missions (the 70's). So, don't pretend that the military is united behind Murtha. There is definitely a difference of opinion going on in there. The whole 'chickenhawk' thing wore thin for me a long time ago.

Posts: 1317 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
David Ricardo
Member
Member # 1678

 - posted      Profile for David Ricardo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Digger, the military is not united behind Murtha.

Yet it is very telling that Republican Congressmen are calling Jack Murtha, a hero of Vietnam and an eternal friend of the Pentagon and the military, a coward to his face on the floor of the U.S. Congress.

And yes, you are a chickenhawk when you call a decorated Vietnam War hero a yellow coward on the floor of the U.S, Congress when you yourself refused to ever serve in the defence of our country when you had the ability to do so.

[ November 18, 2005, 07:34 PM: Message edited by: David Ricardo ]

Posts: 1429 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kent
Member
Member # 832

 - posted      Profile for Kent   Email Kent   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I hate it when Democrats get their own tactics used on them. Shame on Republicans.
Posts: 1434 | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Wait a minute...if in fact it was simply relaying the message of an actual Marine in Iraq that said that, how does this make her "chickenhawk scum?" Why shouldn't a currently deployed Marine be allowed to express that opinion?

LOL

Everytime I see your diatribes Ricardo, I get the mental image of Don Quixote tilting at the neo-con windmills.....

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
David Ricardo
Member
Member # 1678

 - posted      Profile for David Ricardo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I oppose Murtha's 6-month withdrawal resolution, but at least I have the common decency not to call the man a coward on the floor of the U.S. Congress.

I guess that disqulifies me from today's Republican Party. Good thing that I ripped up my party membership a while ago.

[ November 18, 2005, 07:39 PM: Message edited by: David Ricardo ]

Posts: 1429 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kent
Member
Member # 832

 - posted      Profile for Kent   Email Kent   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You did show considerable restraint. . .
Posts: 1434 | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Good thing that I ripped up my party membership a while ago.
Guess so. Remember not to relay any messages are from people better qualified than you to speak on a topic - you'll be slandered and spat upon.
Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
C'mon David, your putting considerable spin on this..

A Marine calls his congressional representative and asks her to relay a message to congress that "Cowards surrender, Marines do not" -- and from that, you are expressing outrage and claiming that "Chickenhawk Republicans are calling vetarans cowards on the floor of the Senate!!!"

Take a deep breath and put down those DemocraticUnderground talking points...

[ November 18, 2005, 07:49 PM: Message edited by: Daruma28 ]

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Now let me add this, if Schmidt made it up and used the Marine's phonecall as a lie to call Murtha a coward, than I agree that it was pretty outrageous.
Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
JoshuaD
Member
Member # 1420

 - posted      Profile for JoshuaD   Email JoshuaD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Daruma28:
C'mon David, your putting considerable spin on this..

A Marine calls his congressional representative and asks her to relay a message to congress that "Cowards surrender, Marines do not" -- and from that, you are expressing outrage and claiming that "Chickenhawk Republicans are calling vetarans cowards on the floor of the Senate!!!"

Take a deep breath and put down those DemocraticUnderground talking points...

Do you think if a anit-war activist called up the same congressional representitive and asked him to say "This war is a human rights violation" or some other spew that there's a chance in hell he'd say it?

He exploited the situation, just like the republicans are doing now. I'm not sure if it's a bad thing (argued w/ Paladine a bit and there's some valid points), but there's no denying this was a stunt.

Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
David Ricardo
Member
Member # 1678

 - posted      Profile for David Ricardo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Nice jab with the DemocraticUnderground slur btw, Daruma. Really unique and innovative. You just need a little more practice though before you get up to Jean Schmidt's level of slime and invective.
Posts: 1429 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
But see JoshuaD, if Cindy Sheehan called Representative Boxer and asked her to say "This war is a human rights violation" and than I came to the board and said "Barbra Boxer and all the Democrats are anti-military, pro-terrorists!!!!"

That would the same kind of spin Mr. Ricardo is using here. A Marine asked his Rep. to realy a message to the Senate, and she relayed it. And from that, Ricardo had to mount up the old broomhandle-lance and tin-bucket-helmet and make another tilt at the neo-con GOP windmills.

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Richard Dey
Member
Member # 1727

 - posted      Profile for Richard Dey   Email Richard Dey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Read Gen Odom on his rationale for a pull-out. He says that the 9 best reasons to stay are the 9 best reasons to get out:

http://www.ornery.org/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=007701;p=0&r=nfx

Posts: 7866 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Schmidt: "He asked me to send Congress a message - stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message - that cowards cut and run, Marines never do," Schmidt said.
From that, we get this from you:

quote:
"Republican Congressmen are calling Jack Murtha, a hero of Vietnam and an eternal friend of the Pentagon and the military, a coward to his face on the floor of the U.S. Congress.

And yes, you are a chickenhawk when you call a decorated Vietnam War hero a yellow coward on the floor of the U.S, Congress."

....

"...it still does not excuse the chickenhawk scum within the Republican Party to call him a coward on the floor of the U.S. Congress."


It is quite apparent that Schmidt did NOT PERSONALLY call Murtha a "yellow coward."

So in this case, DemocraticUnderground talking points is not an off-base criticism of your over-stretched hyperbole.

EDIT - Pete's got it exactly right here in his "Metacowardice" thread he just started:

"There's a difference between calling him a coward (which no one did) and saying that he's advocated a course of action that makes us look like cowards, and that appearances have consequences."

[ November 18, 2005, 08:09 PM: Message edited by: Daruma28 ]

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Richard Dey
Member
Member # 1727

 - posted      Profile for Richard Dey   Email Richard Dey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
[Embarrassed] Sorry [Embarrassed] (!): http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/
Posts: 7866 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
David Ricardo
Member
Member # 1678

 - posted      Profile for David Ricardo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If it was so innocuous, then why did the House of Represenatives have to have an immediate recess, and then have Jean Schmidt renounce her earlier words:

Transcript from House Floor:

quote:
The Speaker Pro Tempore: The house will be in order. The house will be in order. The house will be in order. The house will be in order. The house will be in order. The gentlelady will suspend. And the clerk will report her words. All members will suspend. The gentleman from Arkansas has demanded that the gentlelady's words be taken down. The clerk will report the gentlelady's words.

The Speaker Pro Tempore: The house will be in order. Members pleas take seats. The gentlelady from Ohio.

Ms. Schmidt: Mr. Speaker, my remarks were not directed at any member of the House and I did not intend to suggest that they applied to any member. Most especially the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania. I therefore ask for unanimous consent that my words be withdrawn.

The Speaker Pro Tempore: Without objection. The gentlelady's words will be withdrawn.

Apparently, her invective was too much for even some Republicans to stomach. Of course, it's no surprise that Daruma and his ilk continue to defend such smears to the bitter end.
Posts: 1429 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Interesting choice of bolding what you want to bold...

quote:
my remarks were not directed at any member of the House and I did not intend to suggest that they applied to any member. Most especially the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania.
They had to call a recess because of the hissy fit the Democrats threw when She relayed what the Marine told her.

I am not defending a "smear" to the bitter end. I'm calling you out on a dishonest attack. Yeah it was dishonest to take her exact quote and say she was personally attacking someone. Anyone with an objective mind not twisted by ideological fervor can read the transcript and plainly see that she DID NOT PERSONALLY CALL MURTHA A COWARD. Which is what you dishonestly say she (and other "chickenhawk scum") did.

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I just deleted my Metacowardice thread since David's brought the same thing up here:

Note that David misleadingly claims that Representative Schmidt had "smeared" Murtha. Read more carefully. She read a LETTER from a marine in the FIELD. A letter that the marine had personally ASKED her to read to Congress, about his own feelings about pulling out.

quote:
Originally posted by David Ricardo: In the midst of the House debate on the fake Republican version of Jack Murtha's withdrawal resolution, the Republicans revealed their true nature again.

Money quote from Jean Schmidt(R), Represenative from Ohio (as she smears Jack Murtha as a coward on the floor of the U.S. Congress:

(While speaking of a phone call she received from a Marine colonel, and clearly throwing a low blow at Jack Murtha's courage)

quote:
Schmidt: " He asked me to send Congress a message - stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message - that cowards cut and run, Marines never do," Schmidt said.
Just FYI, Jack Murtha served 37 years in the Marine Corps and has earned several Purple Hearts. Every week, he visits our wounded heroes at Walter Reed. He has even been rewarded with the Semper Fidelis Award by the Marine Corps Foundation, which is the highest honor for a Marine.

This is the Republican Party of today -- a bunch of chickenhawks who took as many deferments as possible to escape from serving our country in Vietnam, yet they malign true American heroes who have already bled for this country back when those chickenhawks were too scared to do so. Pathetic.

If they really wanted to shoot down Murtha's resolution on its merits, they should have just held a vote on the Murtha resolution -- not this fake Republican excuse for a withdrawal resolution.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10097801/

quote:
The fiery, emotional debate climaxed when Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Ohio, the most junior member of the House, told of a phone call she received from a Marine colonel.

“He asked me to send Congress a message — stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message — that cowards cut and run, Marines never do,” Schmidt said.

Democrats booed and shouted her down — causing the House to come to a standstill.

Rep. Harold Ford, D-Tenn., charged across the chamber’s center aisle screaming that it was an uncalled for personal attack. “You guys are pathetic. Pathetic,” yelled Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Mass.

She's reading the letter of a marine in the field. She's not accusing anyone of cowardice. Congress should consider how its actions look to others, and to those whose lives are on the line. There's nothing shameful about that.

quote:
Bush administration officials have been cautious in responding to Murtha.

“We have nothing but respect for Congressman Murtha’s service to his country,” White House communications director Nicolle Wallace told NBC’s “Today” show Friday. “And I think he spoke from the heart yesterday. We happen to have a real serious policy disagreement with him.”

There's a difference between calling him a coward (which no one did) and saying that he's advocated a course of action that makes us look like cowards, and that appearances have consequences.

Why is it that you can't disagree with someone that wants to pull out of the war without them pretending that you're questioning their patriotism?

Lefties are lying about the issues on the table here. Pretending their honor has been attacked whenever someone disagrees with them. This is cowardice, but not the military kind. It's intellectual cowardice. Cowering behind cultural sensitivity and refusing to deal with their oponent's practical arguments.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
David Ricardo
Member
Member # 1678

 - posted      Profile for David Ricardo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pete at Home said first:

quote:
Note that David misleadingly claims that Representative Schmidt had "smeared" Murtha. Read more carefully. She read a LETTER from a marine in the FIELD. A letter that the marine had personally ASKED her to read to Congress, about his own feelings about pulling out.
Pete at Home repeated the falsehood again:

quote:
She's reading the letter of a marine in the field. She's not accusing anyone of cowardice. Congress should consider how its actions look to others, and to those whose lives are on the line. There's nothing shameful about that.
BTW, Pete, you're lying about the letter. There was no letter.

She said she was relaying a phone call that she had received from a Marine, not a letter.

quote:
Ms. Schmidt: Yesterday I stood at Arlington National Cemetery attending the funeral of a young marine in my district. He believed in what we were doing is the right thing and had the courage to lay his life on the line to do it. A few minutes ago I received a call from Colonel Danny Bop, Ohio Representative from the 88th district in the House of Representatives. He asked me to send Congress a message: Stay the course. He also asked me to send Congressman Murtha a message, that cowards cut and run, Marines never do.
You're misleading the rest of us when you pretend that she was "reading a letter" on the floor of the U.S. Congress. Please stop making lies out of whole cloth and use some more imaginative personal attacks against me, okay?

[ November 18, 2005, 08:45 PM: Message edited by: David Ricardo ]

Posts: 1429 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Richard Dey
Member
Member # 1727

 - posted      Profile for Richard Dey   Email Richard Dey   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Pete couldn't have said it, DR [Wink] ! He was in the District snapping some political pix, e.g.: http://www.bartcop.com/tutu-2005-biden.jpg .
Posts: 7866 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Everard
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hrm. Kent, where did I say any of the three things you said I said? I'll clue you in: I didn't say any of them.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Daruma28
Member
Member # 1388

 - posted      Profile for Daruma28   Email Daruma28   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Whatsamatter David...don't like your own tactic? LMAO

Yes, she was relaying a phonecall as you just explicitly stated....the exact same "relaying of a phonecall" that you turned into 'a personal attack on the floor of the senate.'

Personally, I think Pete made an honest mistake, mixing up letter with phonecall - as that really doesn't matter, because the essence of what he is saying is still true: a Marine in Iraq asked for Schmidt to deliver the message to congress and Murtha that to cut and run now is for cowards, not Marines - which you dishonestly turned into a "personal attack by chickenhawk scum calling Murtha a coward."

[ November 18, 2005, 08:50 PM: Message edited by: Daruma28 ]

Posts: 7543 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TCB
Member
Member # 1677

 - posted      Profile for TCB         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Pretending their honor has been attacked whenever someone disagrees with them. This is cowardice, but not the military kind. It's intellectual cowardice. Cowering behind cultural sensitivity and refusing to deal with their oponent's practical arguments.
I agree Pete, but some hawks likewise refuse to engage in intellectual debate by dismissing advocates of withdrawal as cowards rather than addressing their arguments. Neither side is exhibiting the level of debate we deserve from our representatives. Even if they can't rise above it in DC, it would be nice if we could in our little corner of the internet.

I don't see the big deal here. So Schmidt implied that people who want to "cut-and-run" are cowards. Let her talk. Murtha knows he's not a coward. People advocating for withdrawal know they're not cowards. Getting outraged over this kind of thing just lends credibility to childishness.

Posts: 824 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I erred. She didn't read a letter; she reported what the marine had told her in a phone call. How does that constitute a "lie," and how do you pretend that it changes the essence of what I said?

She's talking about how the marine feels. About how it looks.

quote:
You're misleading the rest of us when you pretend that she was "reading a letter" on the floor of the U.S. Congress. Please stop making lies out of whole cloth and use some more imaginative personal attacks against me, okay?
Thanks for that illustration of what I meant by intellectual cowardice, David. You take my confusion between a letter and a phone call, and turn that into a personal attack on you?

Calling someone a liar is a personal attack.

Mistaking a letter for a phone call is not. And what in the world would that have to do with you, anyway?

The only thing I said is that your claim that Representative Schmidt had "smeared" Murtha was "misleading." Well it is misleading. That's not an attack on you. It could have been an honest mistake (although your smarmy "I've been attacked!" reply casts the sincerity of your foolishness into doubt).

Here's what I said again, with the corrections, and you can see it doesn't change my point:

Note that David misleadingly claims that Representative Schmidt had "smeared" Murtha. Read more carefully. She RECOUNTED A PHONE CALL from a marine in the field. A MESSAGE that the marine had personally asked her to convey to Congress, about his own feelings about pulling out.

She's CONVEYING A MESSAGE FROM a marine in the field. She's not accusing anyone of cowardice. Congress should consider how its actions look to others, and to those whose lives are on the line. There's nothing shameful about that.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1