Why?
What are they SO scared of that they would rather make no statement that comes from the Senate rather than debate all resolutions set before them?
The vote for cloture that Harry Reid continues to try to steamroll through is a method of closing a debate and demanding an immediate vote. Just look at the actual meaning of the word Cloture and understand that once again the Democrats are assuming that we, the American public, are too stupid to understand the political game that Harry Reid is trying to play.
clo·ture [kloh-cher] Pronunciation Key - verb, -tured, -tur·ing. U.S. Parliamentary Procedure
–noun
1. a method of closing a debate and causing an immediate vote to be taken on the question.
–verb (used with object), verb (used without object)
2. to close (a debate) by cloture.
So, Reid is trying to "close" the debate rather than give the American people a full debate.
Now let us look at the reasons why Harry Reid and the Democrats are so scared of having a "full" debate and would rather have nothing.
One resolution is terrifying for the Democratic party in the Senate and the house... it was written by Judd Gregg and the text is:
Expressing the sense of the Congress that no funds should be cut off or reduced for American troops in the field which would result in undermining their safety or their ability to complete their assigned missions.
In the Senate of the United States
Concurrent Resolution
Expressing the sense of the Congress that no funds should be cut off or reduced for American troops in the field which would result in undermining their safety or their ability to complete their assigned missions.
Whereas under Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution of the United States, the President is the "commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States", and in such capacity the president has the command of the Armed Forces, including the authority to deploy troops and direct military campaigns during wartime;
Whereas under Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution of the United States, Congress has the power of the purse specifically as it relates to the Armed Forces, and in such capacity Congress has the responsibility to fully and adequately provide funding for United States military forces, especially when they are at war and are defending the Nation; and
Whereas when United States military forces are in harm's way and are protecting our country, Congress and the Nation should give them all the support they need on order to maintain their safety and accomplish their assigned missions, including the equipment logistics, and funding necessary to ensure their safety and effectiveness, and such support is the responsibility of both the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch of Government: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that Congress should not take any action that will endanger United States military forces in the field, including the elimination or reduction of funds for troops in the field, as such action with respect to funding would undermine their safety or harm their effectiveness in pursuing their assigned missions.
Let me remind Harry Reid of his own words here:
Reid vowed that Democrats will find other ways to oppose the president's policies. "You can run, but you can't hide," he said. "We are going to debate Iraq."
So, Mr. Reid, why aren't you debating Iraq? Why are you running AND hiding from the Gregg Resolution? What are you so scared of? You, Sir, are a liar because it is none other than YOU that is stopping a full debate on Iraq.
Because the Gregg resolution is the only one that has full bipartisan support with enough votes to successfully pass and Harry Reid knows this...hence his terror about allowing a full debate on Iraq and his insistence that there only be a partial debate..... doesn't the American people want a complete debate?
Wapo has an article out with the headline reading "Senate Rejects Renewed Effort to Debate Iraq"
One has to wonder at the clear distortion here, the title should read, "Senate rejects renewed effort to "close" debate on Iraq". Read above about what Cloture means from the dictionary. Is Wapo that stupid that they do not know the meaning of the word or are they once again deliberately trying to mislead the public, assuming, as the Democrats assume, that we are too stupid to understand the meaning the word "Cloture"?
Maybe someone should send the definition from the dictionary to the two writers of the Wapo piece, Carl Hulse and Jeff Zeleny or maybe the just need to go back to school.
The Chicago Sun Times has a few words for Murtha and his "slow bleed" strategy:
"The Murtha plan, based on existing military guidelines, includes a stipulation that Army troops who have already served in Iraq must be granted two years at home before an additional deployment. . . . The idea is to slowly choke off the war by stopping the deployment of troops from units that have been badly degraded by four years of combat."
So "the Murtha plan" is to deny the president the possibility of victory while making sure Democrats don't have to share the blame for the defeat. But of course he's a great American! He's a patriot! He supports the troops! He doesn't support them in the mission, but he'd like them to continue failing at it for a couple more years. As John Kerry wondered during Vietnam, how do you ask a soldier to be the last man to die for a mistake? By nominally "fully funding" a war you don't believe in but "limiting his ability to use the money." Or as the endearingly honest anti-war group MoveCongress.org put it, in an e-mail preview of an exclusive interview with the wise old Murtha:
"Chairman Murtha will describe his strategy for not only limiting the deployment of troops to Iraq but undermining other aspects of the president's foreign and national security policy."
"Undermining"? Why not? To the Slow-Bleed Democrats, it's the Republicans' war. To an increasing number of what my radio pal Hugh Hewitt calls the White-Flag Republicans, it's Bush's war. To everyone else on the planet, it's America's war. And it will be America's defeat.
Amen.
One of the most touching speeches I have seen on the Senate floor was given by Sam Johnson of Texas and he deserved the standing ovation he received.
I will add the full text of his speech here but this one portion actally brought tears to my eyes. He speaks from experience.
“We POWs were still in Vietnam when Washington cut the funding for Vietnam. I know what it does to morale and mission success. Words can not fully describe the horrendous damage of the anti-American efforts against the war back home to the guys on the ground.
“Our captors would blare nasty recordings over the loud speaker of Americans protesting back home…tales of Americans spitting on Vietnam veterans when they came home... and worse.
“We must never, ever let that happen again.
“The pain inflicted by your country’s indifference is tenfold that inflicted by your ruthless captors.
He understands what these resolutions due to the morale of our troops and he cares. Does the Democratic party give a damn about that? Do they even acknowledge the harm they do to our troops morale with their non binding, "symbolic" resolutions that have NO effect on the ground EXCEPT to demoralize our troops?
Sam Johnson's full speech can be found here.
“You know, I flew 62 combat missions in the Korean War and 25 missions in the Vietnam War before being shot down.
“I had the privilege of serving in the United States Air Force for 29 years, attending the prestigious National War College, and commanding two air bases, among other things.
“I mention these stories because I view the debate on the floor not just as a U.S. Congressman elected to serve the good people of the Third District in Texas, but also through the lens of a life-long fighter pilot, student of war, a combat warrior, a leader of men, and a Prisoner of War.
“Ironically, this week marks the anniversary that I started a new life – and my freedom from prison in Hanoi.
“I spent nearly seven years as a Prisoner of War in Vietnam, more than half of that time in solitary confinement. I flew out of Hanoi on February 12, 1973 with other long-held Prisoners of War – weighing just 140 pounds. And tomorrow – 34 years ago, I had my homecoming to Texas – a truly unspeakable blessing of freedom.
“While in solitary confinement, my captors kept me in leg stocks, like the pilgrims… for 72 days….
“As you can imagine, they had to carry me out of the stocks because I couldn’t walk. The following day, they put me in leg irons… for 2 ½ years. That’s when you have a tight metal cuff around each ankle – with a foot-long bar connecting the legs.
“I still have little feeling in my right arm and my right hand… and my body has never been the same since my nearly 2,500 days of captivity.
“But I will never let my physical wounds hold me back.
“Instead, I try to see the silver lining. I say that because in some way … I’m living a dream…a hope I had for the future.
“From April 16, 1966 to February 12, 1973 – I prayed that I would return home to the loving embrace of my wife, Shirley, and my three kids, Bob, Gini, and Beverly…
“And my fellow POWs and I clung to the hope of when – not if – we returned home.
“We would spend hours tapping on the adjoining cement walls about what we would do when we got home to America.
“We pledged to quit griping about the way the government was running the war in Vietnam and do something about it… We decided that we would run for office and try to make America a better place for all.
“So – little did I know back in my rat-infested 3 x 8 dark and filthy cell that 34 years after my departure from Hell on Earth… I would spend the anniversary of my release pleading for a House panel to back my measure to support and fully fund the troops in harm’s way….and that just days later I would be on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives surrounded by distinguished veterans urging Congress to support our troops to the hilt.
“We POWs were still in Vietnam when Washington cut the funding for Vietnam. I know what it does to morale and mission success. Words can not fully describe the horrendous damage of the anti-American efforts against the war back home to the guys on the ground.
“Our captors would blare nasty recordings over the loud speaker of Americans protesting back home…tales of Americans spitting on Vietnam veterans when they came home... and worse.
“We must never, ever let that happen again.
“The pain inflicted by your country’s indifference is tenfold that inflicted by your ruthless captors.
“Our troops – and their families – want, need and deserve the full support of the country – and the Congress. Moms and dads watching the news need to know that the Congress will not leave their sons and daughters in harm’s way without support.
“Since the President announced his new plan for Iraq last month, there has been steady progress. He changed the rules of engagement and removed political protections.
“There are reports we wounded the number two of Al Qaeda and killed his deputy. Yes, Al Qaeda operates in Iraq. It’s alleged that top radical jihadist Al-Sadr has fled Iraq – maybe to Iran. And Iraq’s closed its borders with Iran and Syria. The President changed course and offered a new plan …we are making progress. We must seize the opportunity to move forward, not stifle future success.
“Debating non-binding resolutions aimed at earning political points only destroys morale, stymies success, and emboldens the enemy.
“The grim reality is that this House measure is the first step to cutting funding of the troops…Just ask John Murtha about his ‘slow-bleed’ plan that hamstrings our troops in harm’s way.
“Now it’s time to stand up for my friends who did not make it home – and those who fought and died in Iraq - so I can keep my promise that when we got home we would quit griping about the war and do something positive about it…and we must not allow this Congress to leave these troops like the Congress left us.
“Today, let my body serve as a brutal reminder that we must not repeat the mistakes of the past… instead learn from them.
“We must not cut funding for our troops. We must stick by them. We must support them all the way…To our troops we must remain…always faithful.
“God bless you and I salute you all. Thank you.”
Listen to the man speak, so elequently and from the heart, something the Democrats do not seem to have anymore...no heart.
So, let us have a full and honest debate instead of the lies that Harry Reid keeps insisting on portraying... Full and honest, considering and debating all resolutions.... if he isn't too scared to allow completely transparent and honest debate.
The American people want a full debate and we should be insisting on it....not the limited debate that Harry Reid keeps trying to push through because of his fear of the Gregg Resolution.
Come on Mr. Reid, lets get to it, stop running, stop hiding and do your job you worthless sniveling little coward....we are ready....are you?
To the Republicans that are insisting on a full debate, good for you!!!!!
To the White Flag Republicans are that are willing to see the debate close with only one resolution to be discussed.... we will not forget and you will not see a dime in contributions, a vote or any help whatsoever for your next election, because we have no need for Republicans that will bend over and let Harry Reid have your ass....
Others discussing this issue:
Hugh Hewitt's TownHall Blog, Blue Crab Boulevard, Wizbang and PrairiePundit
.
