[SallyIsNice5]

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Democratic-controlled House issued a symbolic rejection of President Bush's plan to deploy more troops to Iraq on Friday, opening an epic confrontation between Congress and commander in chief over an unpopular war that has taken the lives of more than 3,100 U.S. troops.

The vote on the nonbinding measure was 246-182.

"The stakes in Iraq are too high to recycle proposals that have little prospect for success," said Speaker Nancy Pelosi, leader of Democrats who gained power last fall in elections framed by public opposition to the war.

"The passage of this legislation will signal a change in direction in Iraq that will end the fighting and bring our troops home," she vowed.

Bush's Republican allies said repeatedly the measure would lead to attempts to cut off funds for the troops. Outnumbered, they turned to Rep. Sam Johnson of Texas to close their case -- and the former Vietnam prisoner of war stepped to the microphone as lawmakers in both parties rose to applaud his heroism.

"Now it's time to stand up for my friends who did not make it home, and for those who fought and died in Iraq already," he said. "We must not cut funding for our troops. We must stick by them," he added, snapping off a salute as he completed his remarks to yet another ovation.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/....ap/index.html Nothing demonstrates deep conviction like a non-binding resolution.

Seems kind of like the legislative equivalent of masturbation.

Matt

[LesLattis]

I don't know... I think it is effective in the message that it sends.

Our elected representatives are representing us by objecting to the war policy of the Bush administration.

With this objection noted, Bush is under ever so much pressure to resolve the situation in some way. Bush took a poop on the floor and America has said "Bad Poop!!!" Now it's Bush's move.. He better be careful or he's goin' to the doghouse.

[Sdinozes]

I symbolically care.

[SallyIsNice5]

Leaving aside the particulars of Iraq for a moment, we have here a substantive majority of the House of Representative who believe that they received a mandate from the American people to change something in our government.

So they've boldly struck a dynamic pose before the TV cameras and done....

nothing.

No definitive action taken. More a "well, gee, we kinda sorta think that maybe, you know, you might want to not do that".

If the majority of Americans want something changed, and if the majority of the House truly believes the American people want it changed, then why take such a meaningless step?

Matt

[24MurinivaMak]

I symbolically care.

Me too, I am symbolically happy that at least something is being done.

[LesLattis]

Leaving aside the particulars of Iraq for a moment, we have here a substantive majority of the House of Representative who believe that they received a mandate from the American people to change something in our government.

So they've boldly struck a dynamic pose before the TV cameras and done....

nothing.

No definitive action taken. More a "well, gee, we kinda sorta think that maybe, you know, you might want to not do that".

If the majority of Americans want something changed, and if the majority of the House truly believes the American people want it changed, then why take such a meaningless step?

Matt

This was just a message.... the meaningful steps will be to vote "no" to proposals that ask for additional funding of the war.

The big debate will be whether cutting funding means leaving our troops hang out to dry or if it only forces us to set a timeline for withdrawl before the current allocated funds dry up.

We will hear about this debate in the press ad nauseum for months. I suppose if we want to be active citizens, we can write our representatives about how we feel about the legislation when it is proposed.

[Sdinozes]

In a way, we're all pretty much congressmen.

We debate politics for a few hours every week, all while wasting our employers money.

[dhrishiasv]

Bush won't listen to the UN or Congress. He is obviously getting information from somewhere else, not first hand. I say he should be on the front line with his soldiers.

This whole senerio reminds me too much of George Orwell's 1984

[SallyIsNice5]

Me too, I am symbolically happy that at least something is being done.

WTF is being "done"?

The House has issued a little "golly, we don't want you to do that, but we lack the integrity to actually try and stop you" resolution.

WTF does that actually do?

The square root of fuck all, that's what!

Matt

[24MurinivaMak]

In a way, we're all pretty much congressmen.

We debate politics for a few hours every week, all while wasting our employers money.

And Bush refuses to listen to us too.

[SallyIsNice5]

This was just a message.... the meaningful steps will be to vote "no" to proposals that ask for additional funding of the war.

OK, let's have a look at this. If the war is in fact wrong, and must be ended, then why screw around with this non-binding nonsense and get down to the business of forcing an end to it?

The big debate will be whether cutting funding means leaving our troops hang out to dry or if it only forces us to set a timeline for withdrawl before the current allocated funds dry up.

And rather than get on with that important debate, we've pissed around and produced this non-binding Hallmark "We hate the war" greeting card.

We will hear about this debate in the press ad nauseum for months. I suppose if we want to be active citizens, we can write our representatives about how we feel about the legislation when it is proposed.

Our legislators - or at least a majority of them - allegedly already know that the majority of Americans want the troops out. That's what their leadership campaigned on.

So if that is their actual belief, why are they wasting time and money on this nonsense instead of actually putting into action what they said their constituents want?

Matt

[SallyIsNice5]

And Bush refuses to listen to us too.

OK, then why waste time and effort with this non-binding tripe?

Matt

[scewDeasp]

Leaving aside the particulars of Iraq for a moment, we have here a substantive majority of the House of Representative who believe that they received a mandate from the American people to change something in our government.

So they've boldly struck a dynamic pose before the TV cameras and done....

nothing.

No definitive action taken. More a "well, gee, we kinda sorta think that maybe, you know, you might want to not do that".

If the majority of Americans want something changed, and if the majority of the House truly believes the American people want it changed, then why take such a meaningless step?

Matt

Ultimately Matt, the congress has no power when it comes to a war. Fortunately, our founding fathers had enough sense to know that a body of baffoons that can only agree when to take a vacation could not possibly agree on a war strategy. There can be only one commander in chief, not 300 million. Whether he is right or wrong, they have zero power. About the only thing they could possibly do to end this now is to completely cut funding for the war. That would be political suicide for the defeatist party so in their typical symbolism over substance moves, they passed gas.

[LesLattis]

OK, let's have a look at this. If the war is in fact wrong, and must be ended, then why screw around with this non-binding nonsense and get down to the business of forcing an end to it?



And rather than get on with that important debate, we've pissed around and produced this non-binding Hallmark "We hate the war" greeting card.



Our legislators - or at least a majority of them - allegedly already know that the majority of Americans want the troops out. That's what their leadership campaigned on.

So if that is their actual belief, why are they wasting time and money on this nonsense instead of actually putting into action what they said their constituents want?

Matt

Well it's not enough for sure... I agree with you. But the momentum of public opinion is leaning more toward an anti-war sentiment every day.

This is more or less a warning to Bush. If he doesn't pull a rabbit out of his hat, and quick, he's going to be in a world of shit if he isn't already. He can't fight the will of the American people. Before this resolution, Pro-Bushies could argue that POLLS are flawed, but this resolution is a clear overwhelming condemnation of his policy that cannot be refuted. He is now officially bucking the will of the American people.

So he's on a shorter leash than ever. We will soon find out if our legislators have the balls to take real action and take the steering wheel away from Bush.

[Alupleintilla]

GOP were obviously expecting this result. Now they can camly blame the Dems for (Bushs) failure's in Iraq. Its a win win win, situation. Who said Bush was dumb?

[annouhMus]

Nothing demonstrates deep conviction like a non-binding resolution.

Seems kind of like the legislative equivalent of masturbation.

Matt

you say this to many, but few are listening.

[merloermfgj]

In a way, we're all pretty much congressmen.

We debate politics for a few hours every week, all while wasting our employers money.

Haha.

So true. But wait...I am retired (not to be confused with ETSd. I am RETIRED), just graduated with my second degree...and don't start back to work in the real-world until May.

I am wasting TAXPAYERS money!

Hell, I might as well BE a Congressman~!

/chuckle

[annouhMus]

Leaving aside the particulars of Iraq for a moment, we have here a substantive majority of the House of Representative who believe that they received a mandate from the American people to change something in our government.

So they've boldly struck a dynamic pose before the TV cameras and done....

nothing.

No definitive action taken. More a "well, gee, we kinda sorta think that maybe, you know, you might want to not do that".

If the majority of Americans want something changed, and if the majority of the House truly believes the American people want it changed, then why take such a meaningless step?

Matt

Continue your rant, but we ain't listening.(at least not many of us.) We would prefer to wait for further "EXPECTED" actions.

[casinobonusa]

I would say that this non-binding resolution (although it is equivalent to trying to bake a cake in an unheated oven) is a small step. At least they are taking "baby steps" in the right direction. Bush doesn't even LOOK to the general direction let alone listen to anyone. I sure as hell wish they would just make a resolution to support the troops financially (food water, etc) until we bring them home immediately. Probably would cost a lot less too.

[MegaJIT]

w needs to know he no longer has a blank check. And the american people need to know that he knows it. This seems like a reasonable way to go on the record with that information.