Posted on 11/19/2005 12:50:54 AM PST by Former Military Chick
WASHINGTON - The House on Friday overwhelmingly rejected calls for an immediate troop withdrawal from Iraq, a vote engineered by the Republicans that was intended to fail. Democrats derided the vote as a political stunt.
"Our troops have become the enemy. We need to change direction in Iraq," said Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania, a Democratic hawk whose call a day earlier for pulling out troops sparked a nasty, personal debate over the war.
The House voted 403-3 to reject a nonbinding resolution calling for an immediate troop withdrawal.
"We want to make sure that we support our troops that are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. We will not retreat," Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., said as the GOP leadership pushed the issue to a vote over the protest of Democrats.
It was the second time in less than a week that President Bush's Iraq policy stirred heated debate in Congress. On Tuesday, the Senate defeated a Democratic push for Bush to lay out a timetable for withdrawal.
Murtha, a 73-year-old Marine veteran decorated for combat service in Vietnam, issued his call for a troop withdrawal at a news conference on Thursday. In little more than 24 hours, Hastert and Republicans decided to put the question to the House.
Democrats said it was a political move and quickly decided to vote against it in an attempt to drain it of significance.
"A disgrace," declared House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
"The rankest of politics and the absence of any sense of shame," added Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland, the No. 2 House Democrat.
Republicans hoped to place Democrats in an unappealing position - either supporting a withdrawal that critics said would be precipitous or opposing it and angering voters who want an end to the conflict. They also hoped the vote could restore GOP momentum on an issue - the war - that has seen plummeting public support in recent weeks.
Democrats claimed Republicans were changing the meaning of Murtha's withdrawal proposal. He has said a smooth withdrawal would take six months.
At one point in the emotional debate, Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Ohio, 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. Murtha is a 37-year Marine veteran.
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 Republicans were making uncalled-for personal attacks.
"You guys are pathetic! Pathetic!" yelled Rep. Marty Meehan, D-Mass.
Democrats gave Murtha a standing ovation as he entered the chamber and took his customary corner seat.
The fireworks, as lawmakers rushed toward a two-week Thanksgiving break, came just days after the GOP-controlled Senate defeated a Democratic push for Bush to lay out a timetable for withdrawal. Spotlighting questions from both parties about the war, senators approved a statement that 2006 should be a significant year in which conditions are created for the phased withdrawal of U.S. forces.
Murtha has proposed his own resolution, which would force the president to withdraw the nearly 160,000 troops in Iraq "at the earliest practicable date." It would establish a quick-reaction force and a nearby presence of Marines in the region. It also said the U.S. must pursue stability in Iraq through diplomacy.
The Republican alternative simply said: "It is the sense of the House of Representatives that the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately."
"It's just heinous," Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Calif., said of the Republican move.
"This is a personal attack on one of the best members, one of the most respected members of this House, and it is outrageous," said Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass.
Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, however, said the resolution vote was not a stunt. "This is not an attack on an individual. This is a legitimate question."
"They've been itching for a fight for a long time," Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said of the Democrats.
Bush, traveling in Asia, also fired back at his critics, saying a troop withdrawal would be "a recipe for disaster."
Most Republicans oppose Murtha's call for withdrawal, and some Democrats also have been reluctant to back his position.
A growing number of House members and senators, looking ahead to off-year elections next November, are publicly worrying about a quagmire in Iraq. They have been staking out new positions on a war that is increasingly unpopular with the American public, has resulted in more than 2,000 U.S. military deaths and has cost more than $200 billion.
A U.S. field commander in Iraq countered the position of the congressman who usually backs the Pentagon.
"Here on the ground, our job is not done," said Col. James Brown, commander of the 56th Brigade Combat Team, when asked about Murtha's comments during a weekly briefing that American field commanders give to Pentagon reporters.
It was pointed out very well last night that BJ Clinton's "home by Christmas" pledge for Kosovo was nothing but hot air....we STILL have troops there after 10 years.
"WASHINGTON - The House on Friday overwhelmingly rejected calls for an immediate troop withdrawal from Iraq, a vote engineered by the Republicans that was intended to fail. Democrats derided the vote as a political stunt. "
Why was it intended to fail? I mean if the Democrats felt so strongly about us pulling out, the vote would have been 230-215. But 403-3?
Now the RATS have to shut their pie holes. They had the chance to complain, they did and now they are on record for supporting the military in Iraq.
Where's the "they can dish it out but not take it" alert. LOL
Man, is this piece loaded up with lefty drivel or what?
Thinking about these schumcks ever take the reigns of power again in the US, one wonders if we'll see another Civil War.
AND, this guy knows 'pathetic' from personal experience there in Massasschewsitz.
Thereby ending Mr. Ford's run at a Senate seat in Tennessee next year.
I'm recalling Burtha's (err...Murtha's) comment about VP Cheney's five deferments, using that to say that he (Cheney) has no say...I seem to remember reading that Jean Francois Kerry had FOUR deferments, and only went when the FIFTH one was turned down...or let's not forget DNC Chair Howard Dean, who got a medical deferment from serving in Nam, and was soon spotted SKIING.
I suggest a new amendment - that no one else can use Vietnam as a piggyback to higher political aspirations. Why the hell anyone would want to pimp being a part of a war that we LOST is anyone's guess. And we lost it because of shickenchit ideas like Murtha's (only in Nam, it was carried out to fruition).
Welcome aboard.
Is it possible that this is what John Kerry will look like, in 15 years?
He was both a Vietnam War and Korean War veteran and, as NPR was trumpeting yesterday, he has two Purple Hearts. That, however, makes his opinion no more sacrosanct than the opinion of my uncle who also has two Purple Hearts and whose opinion the liberal news media could care less about as it differs from their political agenda.
By the way, when is Harry Truman going to bring the troops back from Korea?
I vote for a combination of electoshock therapy and high colonics, repeated every 4 hours.
I'm trying to remember who said that. I hope the House Record from last night will be posted soon.
Somewhere in America, there's the dumbest 73-year-old Marine veteran decorated for combat service in Vietnam in America.
Where's the FDR "exit strategy" (signal of surrender) for Germany? Japan?
If I recall, it was the last speaker, Texas Congressman Sam Johnson. The DUmocrats also didn't want him to finish, but were too spineless to go on record as opposing him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.