Skip to comments.
McConnell offers no support for military strike against Syria (Then filibuster the vote, Mitch!)
the Hill ^
| 9/3/13
| Alexander Bolton
Posted on 09/03/2013 10:59:32 AM PDT by jimbo123
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Tuesday did not offer support for a military strike against Syria.
In a stark contrast with GOP leaders in the House, McConnell voiced skepticism about a strike and said Obama needed to explain more to Congress and the public.
-snip-
McConnell is up for reelection in 2014 and is facing a tough Tea Party challenge from the right.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: alqaeda; israel; russia; syria; worldwar3
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
1
posted on
09/03/2013 10:59:32 AM PDT
by
jimbo123
To: jimbo123
the Republican't House Congressional Leadership, surrenders again..again..again..again..again..again..again..again..
2
posted on
09/03/2013 11:01:42 AM PDT
by
skinkinthegrass
(who'll take tomorrow,$pend it all today;who can take your income & tax it all away..0'Blowfly can :-)
To: jimbo123
(Then filibuster the vote, Mitch!)No, have all of the Republicans vote "Present" and let Obama and the Democrats own this 100%.
3
posted on
09/03/2013 11:02:33 AM PDT
by
Monitor
("The urge to save humanity is almost always a false-front for the urge to rule it." - H. L. Mencken)
To: jimbo123
Then filibuster and rally the senators you cowardly nimrod!
4
posted on
09/03/2013 11:02:50 AM PDT
by
Viennacon
To: Viennacon
5
posted on
09/03/2013 11:04:27 AM PDT
by
jimbo123
To: jimbo123
His MO is to work for the Democrats’ cause in getting things through the Senate, but preserve a public vote or position that helps him back in Kentucky when he deems it necessary.
To: jimbo123
Obama needed to explain more to Congress and the public. Yes, we need more gas from this bag, because, if you can't trust Obama, who can you trust?
7
posted on
09/03/2013 11:04:55 AM PDT
by
St_Thomas_Aquinas
(Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7)
To: jimbo123
Nope. A filibuster is over the top in this instance. This is a serious issue that requires an up or down vote.
A filibuster would just look like more Republican obstructionism. Take the vote, let the winning side own the decision.
8
posted on
09/03/2013 11:06:06 AM PDT
by
brownsfan
(Behold, the power of government cheese.)
To: Monitor
No, have all of the Republicans vote "Present" and let Obama and the Democrats own this 100%. That's the ticket! Tell the people they didn't want to help cover up the sham vote.
9
posted on
09/03/2013 11:06:45 AM PDT
by
Kenny
(<p)
To: jimbo123
10
posted on
09/03/2013 11:08:22 AM PDT
by
Cheerio
(Barry Hussein Soetoro-0bama=The Complete Destruction of American Capitalism)
To: Viennacon
cowardly nimrods don’t do things like that ;-)
11
posted on
09/03/2013 11:13:19 AM PDT
by
bigbob
To: Monitor
He’ll start taking heavy flak from Rand Paul at home if he does support it.
To: jimbo123
I am sure that Mitch would oppose support for Al Queda if he were not up for re-election! lol Bob
13
posted on
09/03/2013 11:16:06 AM PDT
by
alstewartfan
("I don't want to think. Just leave me here to drink, wrapped up in the warmth of New York City." Al)
To: alstewartfan
You got that right. Mitch is running scared, he knows Real people republicans, not cold out politicians do not want war in Syria./
Why should we fight for Al Qaeda.
14
posted on
09/03/2013 11:34:28 AM PDT
by
Venturer
( cowardice posturing as tolerance =political correctness)
To: Venturer
” Why should we fight for Al Qaeda.”
Because Boehner just voted to do so.
15
posted on
09/03/2013 12:08:29 PM PDT
by
stephenjohnbanker
(The only people in the world who fear Obama are American citizens. KILL THE BILL!)
To: jimbo123
He’s trying to vote “present.”
16
posted on
09/03/2013 12:09:40 PM PDT
by
Cyber Liberty
(Uncle Miltie: Obama poisoned race relations for a generation. Everything is racial now.)
To: brownsfan
Nope. A filibuster is over the top in this instance. This is a serious issue that requires an up or down vote. A filibuster would just look like more Republican obstructionism. Take the vote, let the winning side own the decision.
There is a lot of sense in that position. I wish we could count on all the GOP to vote against the resolution after it clears the filibuster votes. There is a contingent wanting to follow that madman McQueeg off the cliff, possibly large enough to give Obastard the "bipartisan" cover he wants to stick it to the Pubbies if this goes badly.
17
posted on
09/03/2013 12:12:50 PM PDT
by
Cyber Liberty
(Uncle Miltie: Obama poisoned race relations for a generation. Everything is racial now.)
To: stephenjohnbanker
Well then send that sorry MF’er over there.
18
posted on
09/03/2013 12:14:21 PM PDT
by
Venturer
( cowardice posturing as tolerance =political correctness)
To: Venturer
19
posted on
09/03/2013 12:19:19 PM PDT
by
stephenjohnbanker
(The only people in the world who fear Obama are American citizens. KILL THE BILL!)
To: stephenjohnbanker
Isn’t this joining with al queda treason?
20
posted on
09/03/2013 1:00:01 PM PDT
by
hal ogen
(First Amendment or Reeducation Camp?)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
