I can't believe the kerfluffle that hit the MSM and the moonbat blogosphere over the GOP's insistence that we take the Democrats' words seriously, such as this "political gamesmanship" by the GOP in the House & Senate. (And shouldn't that be games-person-ship?). This article is brimming with the type of bias that drives conservatives batty - writing from the perspective of the minority party. My emphasis added:
Senate Rejects U.S. Troop Pullout in IraqI'd like to note that this is probably more "hawkish" than the actual Democratic proposals, which call for pulling out of Iraq completely.
Jun 15, 7:45 PM (ET)
By LIZ SIDOTI
WASHINGTON (AP) - Congress plunged into divisive election-year debate on the Iraq war Thursday as the U.S. military death toll reached 2,500. The Senate soundly rejected a call to withdraw combat troops by year's end, and House Republicans laid the groundwork for their own vote.
In a move Democrats criticized as gamesmanship, Senate Republicans brought up the withdrawal measure and quickly dispatched it - for now - on a 93-6 vote.
The proposal would have allowed "only forces that are critical to completing the mission of standing up Iraqi security forces" to remain in Iraq in 2007.
Across Capitol Hill in a daylong House debate, Republicans defended the Iraq war as a key part of the global fight against terrorism while Democrats assailed President Bush's war policies and called for a new direction in the conflict.ie, this is the John F-ing Kerry proposal - word for word.
Republicans moved toward a vote on a resolution to reject any timetable for withdrawing U.S. forces.
Republicans in both the Senate and House sought to put lawmakers of both parties on record on an issue certain to be central in this fall's congressional elections.
The Senate vote unfolded unexpectedly as the second-ranking leader, Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., introduced legislation he said was taken from a proposal by Sen. John Kerry, the Massachusetts Democrat and war critic. It called for Bush to agree with the Iraqi government on a schedule for withdrawal of combat troops by Dec. 31, 2006.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said if the United States withdrew prematurely, "I am absolutely convinced the terrorists would see this as vindication." He predicted terrorism would spread around the world, and eventually reach the United States if the United States were to "cut and run" before Iraq can defend itself.No WMDs (except for this info which suggests otherwise) and no cutting & running, except for the unending calls by the Dems to do just that.
Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada shot back: "Two things that don't exist in Iraq and have not, weapons of mass destruction, and cutting and running."
He accused Republicans of political gamesmanship and sought to curtail floor debate on the proposal. The vote occurred quickly.
Republicans arranged for the debate to culminate in a vote on a resolution that praises U.S. troops, labels the Iraq war part of the larger global fight against terrorism and says an "arbitrary date for the withdrawal or redeployment" of troops is not in the national interest.
Democrats decried the debate as a sham, saying Republicans promised an open discussion but, instead, stacked the deck in their favor by limiting debate to 10 hours and barring any amendments. They also complained that Republicans refused to allow them to present an alternative resolution - though Democrats weren't able to agree on just what to offer.
So, the Dems wanted to amend a simply worded and pretty binary resolution - and the GOP wouldn't let them. How insensitive! And I love that even if the GOP had given that option to the Dems, they wouldn't know what to add.
And this is the party that wants to be in the majority come January?
ARC: St Wendeler