Home / House Resolution 571: The U.S. House of Representatives Puts On a Show

House Resolution 571: The U.S. House of Representatives Puts On a Show

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Skipping my normal Friday night lineup of favorite television shows, I remained glued to C-Span on Nov. 18 from 6:30 pm until almost midnight as the US House of Representatives put on a show that alternatively shocked, embarrassed, elated, and ultimately pleased me greatly.

First, please let us lay lie to the upcoming Democratic talking points next week that will moan and complain that the Republican proposal was not the same as the one Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) originally proposed. Much more on this alleged military loyalist Murtha later. In Murtha’s own words:

From Noendbutvictory.com:
The United States will immediately redeploy — immediately redeploy. No schedule which can be changed, nothing that’s controlled by the Iraqis, this is an immediate redeployment of our American forces because they have become the target…My plan calls for immediate redeployment of US troops (consistent with the safety of US forces).

Indeed Murtha’s proposal, introduced with great hoopla this past Thursday, was for immediate “redeployment” of our troops from Iraq, and don’t let the Democrats tell you otherwise.

As the hours ticked past, I heard Democrat after Democrat complain that the Republican proposal then up for vote was not the same as Murtha’s.

They were madder then wet hens, folks. Their anger was palpable. The picture below shows House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, and indeed she was ready to join “Heaven’s Gate.”

Image hosted by Photobucket.com

It’s just not right. It’s not right now, it wasn’t right yesterday and it won’t be right tomorrow. It is wrong that political players, in this case the Democrats, get to go out on the international stage and lie that the president, whom they characterize as totally dumb, lied and fooled them and this nation into war in Iraq. Imagine: a dumb president managed to fool every one of them.

Murtha’s proposal, presented to the public and hyped by the mainstream media with great frenzy was, well, it wasn’t really serious. It was only a political ploy. Egads, don’t you get it?

Meanwhile our soldiers sleep in grainy sand in hot and almost inhumane conditions, fighting for victory, and well on their way to winning, never mind the lies and spittle emanating from the mouths of the mainstream media and the Democrats. And the Democrats: They’re the same politicians who voted to send them there out and about. Now they proclaim that the president’s lies sent the toops there. By implication, those soldiers are fighting an illegal war.

It was time for the Republicans to throw down the gauntlet. After all, it is the GOP that has a majority in the House of Representatives, thE institution that most represents the American people in its role as the part of Congress filled with elected representatives based on a state’s population.

So they did.

I’m not sure why the Republicans changed the text of Murtha’s proposal, but such changes were minor. House Resolution 571, put to a vote late into the night on Nov. 18, specifically called for an immediate troop withdrawal from Iraq. Exactly what Murtha proposed. The Republican proposal did have a caveat that it was “non-binding,” as such a thing would be. The US House of Representatives does not have the authority to manage a war. That task is charged to the executive branch as called for in our constitution. The House, as we know from the Vietnam War, can refuse to provide funding for military ventures, which essentially achieves the same end.

Below is the outcome of the vote.

The House voting on the “Immediate Troop Withdrawal From Iraq” Resolution – 571:

Yea = 3
present = 6
Nay = 157

Yea = ZERO
Nay = 215

Final count at 11:33 pm. 11/18/05

The entire episode was enlightening and in some aspects, quite entertaining. The House erupted into boos and catcalls when Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-OH) read a letter from a Marine who stipulated that Marines do not quit the battle. The Democrats considered this, I must conclude, a slap at the vaunted Rep. Murtha, a fellow whose patriotism and devotion to the troops is questionable, based on more information coming out about him.

I learned a lot about House procedure through watching the proceedings. Did you know that the House has to hold a vote in order to vote? I consider this is an incredible waste of time, especially with each step toward the final vote requiring an hour of debate.

The House’s parliamentarian looks exactly like Dan Aykroyd, and the Republicans showed way more passion and emotion than I thought they had in them.

There was much drama, which I suspect was orchestrated for the viewing audience. The Republicans brought out a few war heroes of their own, including the eloquent Rep. Sam Johnson (R-TX). I thought it was cool.

Republicans are notorious for being firm, emotionless, concise and clear. Those GOP representatives last night were damned mad and they weren’t going to take it anymore.

Perhaps I’ve seen too many bloviating senators, members of that clubby group of 100 who proudly carry their little rule books and name bridges, buildings and roads for their handsome selves.

What I saw last night in the US House of Representatives were angry and passionate representatives of the American populace.

All of them, even the Democratic representatives, must go home to face a district of military bases, soldier-constituents and families of soldiers. Having a supposedly loyal military representative go out and call for a removal of our forces in an active war zone was initially a good idea. The Democrats could collect their MoveOn.org/George Soros contributions while going around denying that they agreed with Murtha, yet still sending this demoralizing message — in the view of the GOP base — to our troops. Not to mention our enemies who sit in their caves and wait, as they have plenty of time for America to chicken out. Already Al-Jazeera is quoting Rep. Murtha as if he were Allah.

When pushed to the limit, heh, as was the plan, only three representatives, and they were Moonbats, actually voted to remove our troops from Iraq immediately. This gives them little wiggle room for such an obviously opportunistic political ploy to appease their base and collect their Mooonbat contributions.

The Republicans called the liberals’ bluff, and it was necessary. If the Democrats don’t know how to behave during war time, then someone has to show them.

Given the administration’s recent push back at the “Bush lied and led us to war” meme, and given that the Democrats had their bluff called over this Murtha drama, Those who support them — as their talking points condemn our military while claiming to support the military — will be few and far between.

For when the time came to put their money where their big mouths are, heh, only three of them had the courage to vote what they’d been saying for the past few weeks.

Now, about this Murtha character. By what standard is this fellow considered a military loyalist? By the standard that his brother owns a lobbying company that got millions of dollars in contracts from the Clinton administration? For it’s certainly not indicated by the man’s prior voting record.

John Murtha who voted NO on House resolution 557 on 3 -17 -2004. The resolution passed 327-93.

Here is the text of the resolution which Rep. Murtha found to be so distasteful:

States that the House of Representatives: (1) affirms that the United States and the world have been made safer with the removal of Saddam Hussein and his regime from power in Iraq; (2) commends the Iraqi people for their courage in the face of unspeakable oppression and brutality inflicted on them by Saddam Hussein’s regime; (3) commends the Iraqi people on the adoption of Iraq’s interim constitution; and (4) commends the members of the US Armed Forces and Coalition forces for liberating Iraq and expresses its gratitude for their valiant service.

Let me understand this. John Murtha, labeled a “hawk” by CNN and his Democratic soulmates in the House of Representatives, voted against House Resolution 557, which simply confirms our decision to remove Saddam, commends the Iraqi people, and (note provision number 4) commends the members of the U.S. Armed Forces and Coalition forces for liberating Iraq and expresses its gratitude for their valiant service.

This loyal military guy voted against number 4? I am just an ordinary Grandma Blogger here, but, silly me, I’d consider a vote against the above proposal to be anything but pro-military.

Oh. And there’s more. The blogosphere is just beginning to buzz about this, but it would seem that Murtha’s got some ghosts in his closet.

In due course, we’ll be hearing more about this guy. Meanwhile, the Dems already brought out military “hero” John Kerry, and this didn’t work. Now they trotted out this questionable pro-military relic and got called on it.

It’s time the Democrats root for our side for a change, both in how they vote and in how they present themselves to the international and national community.

Republican lawmakers say that ties between Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) and his brother’s lobbying firm, KSA Consulting, may warrant investigation by the House ethics committee…

According to a June 13 article in the Los Angeles Times, the fiscal 2005 defense appropriations bill included more than $20 million in funding for at least 10 companies for whom KSA lobbied. Carmen Scialabba, a longtime Murtha aide, works at KSA as well.

Image hosted by Photobucket.com

KSA directly lobbied Murtha’s office on behalf of seven companies, and a Murtha aide told a defense contractor that it should retain KSA to represent it, according to the LA Times.

In early 2004, Murtha reportedly leaned on U.S. Navy officials to sign a contract to transfer the Hunters Point Shipyard to the city of San Francisco, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. A company called Lennar Inc. had right to the land, and Laurence Pelosi, nephew to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), was an executive with the firm at that time.

Murtha also inserted earmarks in defense bills that steered millions of dollars in federal research funds toward companies owned by children of fellow Pennsylvania Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D). ..

Review of Memoirs of Josephine Fish here on Blogcritics

Review of Mystery and Mirth here on Blogcritics

Powered by

About pat fish

  • RogerMDillon

    It must have been an off week with the Holiday.

    “Anthony-The Iraqi people have been wonderful.”

    Except the ones who are suicide bombers, right.

    “Just because you say a lie twenty thousand times does NOT make it the truth.”

    You wouldn’t know that from the author’s posts.

  • gonzo marx

    what have Pacifists done?

    ok..google this name…Ghandi

    got it…try Martin Luther King Jr.

    now, me..i’m no pacifist…i have a gung fu practitioners mindset of defense only and use the minimal amount of Force required…but i do Respect a dedicated pacifist having known a few who would stand and be killed rather than raise their hand in violence…

    oh yes..one more devout Pacifist who turned away from any kind of violence which eventually cost him his life…

    Jesus the Nazarene, called Christ (which is greek for “the Anointed”)

    i bet ya heard of him, you remember…the whole “turn the other cheek” bit…

    so, there’s 3 fine examples of what Pacifism has wrought in this world…freeing INdia from colonial rule, civil rights…oh yes…and Christianity, which didn’t turn out as peaceful as the Originator thought, but has been influential

    one last bit…to those who keep attempting to associate Iraq with 9/11…please stop…it hurts to hear such silliness

    Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11…

    on that note…anyone know where Osama is?

    cuz the Shrub sure doesn’t…so much for “most wanted man on earth”…or catching the miserable fucker who planned the assault on our Nation

    but some ignorant, blinder wearing, kool-aid drinking, crypto-fascist, neocon following, short sighted, miserable pigfuckers seem to be easily distracted and forget to be pissed off at the people who actually attacked us

    much easier to attack the much closer political opponent, than to work on solving a difficult problem…like finding a 6’6” arab with a dialysys
    machine in Afghanistan…

    but i digress…


  • And sorry Pat, I didn’t mean to mix the good news with my response but I only just saw the comment.

  • #35 Dave, I know you are self-aware in this respect only, but you long ago perfected the art of bald sanctimony. Perhaps you shouldn’t so badly assume I haven’t read up. That would be the smart thing to do, which is why it didn’t occur to you.

    From your earlier comment “I also suspect he favors ‘redeploying’ those troops to Syria and Iran.”

    Suspect or glean or divine or pull it out of your ass, if it was in the resolution you wouldn’t have to do any of the three. You’d know and quote.

    Find your assertion – because that’s all it is – that he wants to go for Syria and Iran. Here’s the complete text straight from the Congressman.

    He talks about an “over-the-horizon presence of Marines,” but clearly that would be in friendly territory, not fighting, not in the face of direct hostility in Syria and Iran. But even then the surrounding information is not “direct from the legislation.”

    Unles you got a super-secret look-see? Thought not.

    You guessed and suspected and didn’t know anything. Dave The Blatant [Deleted] Caught stinking up the joint again.

  • A section editor pointed your way as a pick of the 11-19/11-25 week. Click HERE to find out why.

    Cheers. Temple

  • Anthony Grande

    You say the peace comes from pacifism?

    Yeah, for a short time. What happens when the bullets start flying over your border? Are you going to sit there and let them drag off your minorities (I am reffering to Jews) and cremate them?

    Where exactly are you from? Denmark? France? Spain? Hollland? You are lucky that us Americans are nice enough to take care of your problems while you want to appease the enemy.

    Did appeasing Hitler work, Ms. Davis? No, he rolled right over your border anyway and us Americans had to save your ass eventhough it was your mistake and your problem.

    There is no such thing as permanent peace. So again, what good comes from pacifism?

    And there is a big difference between the 40 million unborn that is murdered each year and the 4 thousand terrorists that get shot or blown up.

    That is the beauty of America, Ms. Davis. Even the useless pacifists can hold jobs and live normal lives.

    And you say that nothing good comes from war? That is why you are not a capable or rational thinking person.

    War is a natural occuring effect like an earthquake or a tsunami. This will be true as long as we have diversity in religions and cultures. The only way to end all wars is to kill all Arabs and Orientals, make everyone speak one language, destroy all borders and make sure everyone worships the same God. And even then there will be war to see who controls all of this.

  • ss

    In the real world Iraq’s a stalemate that neither the military nor Iraqi politicians can break, and everyone is looking for a scapegoat to blame for the consequences of this fact.

  • Chief Wiggum

    What color is the sky in your world Natalie?

    You aruments and statements have nothing whatsoever to do with reality.

    What good comes from pacifism? Peace.

    So if we take a pacifist attitude toward the islamic terrorists who were responsible for 911 and are planning more attacks there will be peace Natalie?

    Do you honestly believe that?

    What good comes from war? Nothing that makes wounding or killing worthwhile.

    BZZZZZ……….. Wrong again as usual Natalie.

    War, while not desirable, can provide a people with the opportunity to live thier lives the way they desire to rather than have another people dictate to them how to do so.

    In certain situations the ends most definitely justify the means. I am sorry if you are too deluded to realize this Natalie.

    If you had a child and someone was hurting that child and the only way to stop that person was to use agression would you Natalie?

    Maybe someday you will wake up from your world of lollipops, puppy dogs, sunshine and taking clouds and start living in the real world with the rest of us Natalie.

  • We’d all be speaking German? (Or Japanese or Farsi or whatever?) I love languages of all kinds. Comparatively, American English is ugly and without style, IMO. Good riddance.

    That doomsday scenario cracks me up, it really does.

    Being a theoretical socialist, I hope to live in a communal setting in another country at some point.

    What good comes from pacifism? Peace.

    What good comes from war? Nothing that makes wounding or killing worthwhile. (The late Edwin Starr put it quite succinctly: “Absolutely nothing.”)

    So, you’re pro-life but advocate war, aka state-sanctioned killing. You don’t see the contradiction there?

    OK, so you don’t want to kill pacifists. That’s the first positive thought I have had about you, Mr. Grande. But if pacifists are not fit for society, what then? Internment camps? Quarantine? Leper colonies? I’m in, so long as they are not in the control or on the shores of your country. Hell, that may be my best chance to expatriate in the foreseeable future.

  • Anthony Grande

    No Ms. Davis, you know I am Pro-Life (anti-abortion, anti-capital punishment and anti-death to all pacifists).

    What I meant was that we have no use for pacifists. I mean the entire world would be speaking German if pacifists lead the U.S in the 40s. If pacifist lead the U.S. in the Post WWII era we would all be under communist rule. What good comes from pacifism?

  • Should we be killed then? I am well aware that I do not fit into society, but hearing you say that is just chilling. Oh well, send your coalition of the killing my way. Do you need my address?

  • Anthony Grande

    If the entire world population were pacifists this world would be great place.

    There would be wars and instead of building military and raising funds for war we can work on the economy, improving foreign affairs and many other things.

    But the problem is that not everyone in the world are pacifists. Earth gives birth to people like Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Hitler, Saddam, Osama, Zarqawi, Pul Pot and many others so war is inevitable. Because of this natural birth of tyrants war is natural. And because war is natural pacifists have no place in society.

  • “Did the use of violence in resisting the Nazis and the Japanese cause the Russians, Americans, and British to ‘lose’ during World War II … ?”

    Mr./Ms. Wiggum, according to this pacifist’s value system, yes. Even if the ends are good, they are tainted by the commission of violence. There can be no winners by definition.

    nr davis

  • Anthony Grande

    Ms. Davis:

    1) Your 80% number has proven to be WAY off.

    3) 80-85% of Iraqis are happy that we are helping them. So if we pull out we won’t only be hurting 80% or Americans, but 80% or Iraqis also.

    3) The people of Iraq are on our side which means victory is inevitable. The people are the key.

    4) After seeing the first three points and still think that the troops should be pulled out tommarrow then you are not a capable or rational thinking person.


    “You guys on the right have consistently attacked every vet who has disagreed with this war”

    Oh I get it. If the person served in the millitary once in his life then it is wrong for us to disagree with him.

    But if the vetern is a GOP than it is OK to disagree with him.

  • ss

    A) You guys on the right have consistently attacked every vet who has disagreed with this war, your in no position to call anyone’s behavoir towards veterans disgraceful.

    B) It’s only about as obvious as the nose on my face that there will be a reduction in coalition forces in 2006, at least judging from all the comments made by the Brits and Italians to that effect.
    And 2006 is, coincidently enough, an election year here in America.
    So the Dems want to give the impression that they’d like to bring all the boys home, though they won’t actually do it.
    And the GOPs want to give the impression it’s the fault of the Dems and the MSM that they’re forced to make these reductions at all. That’s because they can’t break the stalemate in Iraq, so they need an easier target, namely the Democrats.
    The GOP party faithful doesn’t want to believe that there is a stalemate in Iraq, so they blame the MSM.
    Like the MSM killed 95 American soldiers last month and over 60 so far this month. (That’s the only news coverage that actually matters in the waning support for the war, Right Wing.)
    But all this just takes us back to the fact that the Dems can’t actually make this go away either.
    Looks like we’re in for a long ‘asymetric’ war where troops get brought home in election years, and then sent back the year after, while terrorists operating outside Iraq, like the ones that bombed London, Bali, New Dehli, etc. go about their bloody business unimpaired, and the network that bombed Amman grows and reaches for targets farther away.
    Staying the course won’t change it.
    Leaving won’t change it.
    Not going in the first place, finding some other way to deal with Sadam, was the only way to avoid this from the beginneing.

  • Chief Wiggum

    WEll the point is that the Democrats were booing a soldier who had served in Iraq for no other reason than his statement didn’t support thier view of the war.

    They are disgraceful.

  • Dave Nalle

    The post mentioned how the Democrats in congress booed when the congresswoman from Ohio read the letter a marine who is in Iraq now sent her.

    Actually, the letter was sent by a marine who had returned from Iraq to his state senator who forwarded it on to her.


  • Dave Nalle

    That’s interesting, Mr. Nalle. WBAL-TV in Baltimore reported that another poll showed that 80 percent of the Iraqis polled want you out of their country now and believe that you are hurting more than you are helping. Either WBAL is not deserving of the scads of journalism awards it has won or we have proof that polls don’t mean crap.

    Hey, I like WBAL. Used to watch it sometimes when I lived in Maryland. But I have no idea where they got their data. It could be ancient, it could be a poll of just people in Baghdad. I have no idea. My data is clearly attributed to a BBC poll conducted over the weekend and released yesterday. And unlike WBAL, the BBC has people on the ground in Iraq.


  • Chief Wiggum

    “The use of violence guarantees a loss to both sides.”

    Did the use of violence in resisting the Nazis and the Japanese cause the Russians, Americans, and British to “lose” during World War II Natalie?

  • Mr./Ms. Wiggum, that cause was lost before it began. The use of violence guarantees a loss to both sides.

  • Chief Wiggum

    80 percent of the population doesn’t want you there

    Natalie ……….say’s who?

    You been to Iraq and asked the Iraqis Natalie?

    Or are just regurgitating mainstream media propaganda?

    If we do ultimately lose the war in Iraq it will be do to people like you who undermine the effort with your guise of compassion for the troops.

    The post mentioned how the Democrats in congress booed when the congresswoman from Ohio read the letter a marine who is in Iraq now sent her. The Dems showed thier true colors. They were booing the heartfelt sentiments of a soldier currently serving in Iraq because his words didn’t fall in line with thier deluded view of the reality of the war in Iraq and terrorism.

    Doesn’t get much lower than that now does it folks?

  • What a pity that the young man would set his sights so low.

  • Nancy

    Ms. Natalie, Mr. Grande wants to be Pat Robertson, when/if he grows up. He doesn’t know any better, as he’s demonstrated many a time. And he’s 17. Don’t waste your time.

  • That’s interesting, Mr. Nalle. WBAL-TV in Baltimore reported that another poll showed that 80 percent of the Iraqis polled want you out of their country now and believe that you are hurting more than you are helping. Either WBAL is not deserving of the scads of journalism awards it has won or we have proof that polls don’t mean crap.

    Mr. Grande, your aspersions against my character are beyond the pale, even for you. I do not make things up and I do not lie. And AAMOF, I am among those who want the troops gone now but understand that you have a responsibility to fix what you destroyed before you leave and spread your poison and violence to other places.

  • Your wild guessing AKA putting words in people’s mouths is not “reality.”

    Temple, my ‘wild guessing’ was taken directly from the legislation he introduced in the House last week. Perhaps you should read up on the subject before commenting.


  • Hmm… you (you used the word “we,” so you admit complicity) are in another country, one you have raped and destroyed, without invitation. you refuse to leave even though, according to the evening news, 80 percent of the population doesn’t want you there.

    Actually, according to a BBC poll conducted Sunday 85% of he Iraqi population wants the coalition to remain until their own government is fully functional and terrorism is under conrrol.


  • Alethinos

    SORRY… I seem to have stepped into the room marked CONSERVATIVE LOVE ORGY…

    Sexual-ambiguous-Fish… Way to continue to whip the dead horse of “liberal media”. What a joke. 95% of the “media” in this country are owned by less than a DOZEN MAJOR CORPORATIONS none of which have anything even beginning to resemble a “liberal” bent.

    Next, I can’t remember seeing on ABC, CBS, or NBC interviews of Iraqis that showed anything than an obvious ambivalence toward the American presence. Reading the foreign press as I do I am not seeing much difference when the Iraqi man or woman is interviewed on the street..


  • steve

    murtha is going to keel over any minute. he knows this and he is just trying to get his 15 mins of fame at our soldiers’ expense

  • Anthony Grande

    “are in another country, one you have raped and destroyed,”

    O.k. so allowing a people to vote on their “own” decisions and leaders, not taking but giving resources, and giving then an opportunity to have what we have in called raping and destroying these days. I am all for rape and destruction now.

    “without invitation”

    Really, o.k. pullout the troops I wasn’t aware that Saddam didn’t give us an invitation.

    “according to the evening news, 80 percent of the population doesn’t want you there”

    Now you are just lying to yourself if you believe that, Ms. Davis. I mean I can’t even pretend that I agree with that.

    Have you seen the adds paid for by the Iraqis thanking us?

    Have you heard about the 65% voter turnout in an election that we made possible?

    Are you aware that 80% of Iraq equals about 30 million people?

    How come we haven’t seen mass protest demonstrations against our troops in Iraq?

    How come our 140 thousand troops have not been wipped out by the 30 million? Why do we only have 2 thousand deaths?

    I can’t believe that you use our media as a source.

    I even doubt that our media said 80%. You must have made that one up.

  • lol…

    Hmm… you (you used the word “we,” so you admit complicity) are in another country, one you have raped and destroyed, without invitation. you refuse to leave even though, according to the evening news, 80 percent of the population doesn’t want you there. Yes, Mr. Grande, I would call that occupation.

    nr davis

  • Anthony Grande

    Natalie, no rational or capable person would actually vote or believe that we have to pull the troops out right this minute, yes.

    “…immoral and unjustfiable invasion and occupation.”

    Yes, we indeed invaded, but occupation?

    So taking out a brutal and oppresive dictator, allowing the people of the country to pick what kind of government they should have, and make sure that they can succeed in their goal for democracy is defined as occupation?

  • MCH

    “The guy really IS a hawk. Sorry for the cold dose of reality.”
    – Dave Nalle

    Show me where I said Murtha wasn’t a hawk, Nalle. It was your little buddy RJ who “found” the hawkish reference “hilarious” in comment 12.

  • Re: 18 – Noting that the three who voted in favor of the resolution are principled does not imply that they are the only principled members of the House of Representatives.

    Re: 26 – A person who disagrees with your view can not be a “capable person?” Please.

    And while I agree that certain Dems were shown as the political cowards they are, it is certainly possible to want the troops out now while recognizing that the tragic truth is that the US must fix what it destroyed and continues to destroy through its immoral and unjustfiable invasion and occupation.

  • Anthony Grande

    Murtha is not hawkish, he is going senile.

    MCH, any man or woman that believes that we must leave Iraq right this minute is not a capable person. And just because this particular man or woman has millitary experience it doesn’t overshadow it.

  • GoHah

    First-rate article–good to see, ultimately, a little political poetic justice.

  • Your wild guessing AKA putting words in people’s mouths is not “reality.”

  • Go download a trancript of Meet the Press, MCH. He wants to keep the troop in the Middle East and use them to beat up on other troublesome countries as a ‘rapid reaction’ force. The guy really IS a hawk. Sorry for the cold dose of reality.


  • MCH

    “I also suspect he favors redeploying those troops to Syria and Iran, which might not make MCH so happy.”
    – Dave Nalle

    Well, for one thing I’d prefer to see Murtha’s actual words on what he “favors,” rather than what Dave Nalle “suspects” he favors – if it’s alright with you, Nalle.

  • Murtha IS hawkish. Read up on him. His reaosning for pulling out of Iraq may no be what you expect. He genuinely thinks Iraqi forces could take over and do the job now were we not there giving them an excuse to slack off. I also suspect he favors ‘redeploying’ those troops to Syria and Iran, which might not make MCH so happy. He’s actually getting a lot of flack from other Democrats like Reid and Pelosi over his statements.


  • MCH

    “Also, I find it hilarious how the MSM is talking about how “hawkish” Murtha is…”
    – RJ

    John Murtha’s military experience:
    **U.S. Marines, Intelligence Officer
    **Korean War and Vietnam War combat veteran
    **recipient of the Bronze Star

    RJ’s military experience:
    …None (zero)

  • Anthony Grande

    DAVE NALLE: “He was opposed to the war in the first place, so I’m surprised to see him vote against this resolution.”

    Just because someone opposed the war in the first place doesn’t mean that they want to all of the sudden pull the plug and leave a country without a millitary or strong government.

  • Anthony Grande

    “Last night’s congressional show was a riot. Once again, we see that the Dems — with the exception of three principled people — are no better than the Republicans”

    Well maybe it is you and those 3 who are not better and pricipled as us.

  • Last night’s congressional show was a riot. Once again, we see that the Dems — with the exception of three principled people — are no better than the Republicans.

    “I have come to the conclusion that one worthless man is called a disgrace, that two are called a law firm, and that three or more become a congress. And by God, I have had this Congress!”
    John Adams in the musical 1776

  • Anthony Grande

    The key to winning this operation IS by having the support of the major majority of Iraqis.

    And this we have.

    Sure there will be the daily terrorist attacks and such but for the sake of the Iraqis we must stay the course.

    All Iraq needs now is a strong government (pretty close to this goal) and a millitary that can take care of itself with the least amount of American help. Once this happens, and we leave, the attacks will reduce greatly and the we and the Iraqis can move on with our lives in both of our Democracies.

  • Anthony-The Iraqi people have been wonderful.

    With all the Mainstream media foaming for bad stories, they’ve found few Iraqis to go on TV complaining and moaning. You think they haven’t looked?

    And Iraq/Kurdistan already has a nice web site and some fine commercials thanking America.

    They’ve voted under the most difficult conditions that no American would bother. They’ve formed a constitution while howls that it wouldn’t work, the Sunnis won’t vote, soared all around.

    It’s about time we stop the lies about this war. Just because you say a lie twenty thousand times does NOT make it the truth.

  • Anthony Grande

    MCH, we are very very close to winning Operation Iraqi Freedom. They already ratified the Constitution, they picked the party to head them and know they are about to elect a leader.

    This all proves that the people of Iraq are with us.

    Now, MCH, you tell me: How can we loose?

  • MCH

    Re comment #12;

    One way to prove that you truly believe the war is “winnable” would be an attempt to enlist.

  • RJ

    Also, I find it hilarious that the MSM is talking about how “hawkish” Murtha is, when this same guy was calling the war in Iraq “unwinnable” back in early 2004!

  • Anthony Grande

    That was exiting. This is the first time I ever took the time to watch one of these.

    Now we know that the Democrats are all talk when they say that they want to pull the troops out.

  • RJ

    GREAT stuff!

    I like how you included the potential ethical baggage of Rep. Murtha, as well as direct quotes from Rep. Murtha regarding his support for an “immediate” redeployment…also, that picture of that botoxed, desiccated communist Nancy Pelosi was simply hilarious! 🙂

  • Bliffle

    Murthas actions confirm my feeling that there is something terribly wrong with our military: apparently, men who serve therein turn into monsters. Max Cleland, John McCain, John Kerry and now Murtha: all of them despicable, disloyal, fathering mixed blood children, faking war wounds, etc.

    Whereas, by contrast, men who have spared themselves the corrupting influence of the military, Dick Cheney, George Bush, etc., display the best American characteristics: loyalty, honesty, etc.

  • SonnyD

    Thanks again, Patfish. Great writing style, direct, informative and to the point. None of the emotional baggage some writers are compelled to include.

  • Temple, Charlie Rangel’s military draft resolution could have been described as “grandstanding,” but would have been more accurately described simply as LYING- “deception” perhaps if you want to express it nicely.

    Murtha informally proposed immediate withdrawal of US troops. This resolution simply put it to a vote.

    Whereas the draft move was not based on anything by any Republican. Democrats made it up and submitted it, apparently intending to trick the public into thinking that this was somehow the Republicans’ doing.

  • OhmyGod! I forgot that one!

    Wasn’t it great? The Representatives of the People had their say and they meant it.

    At times I thought I was watching a Japanese parliamentary session. At times I feared the fists would start flying.

    Well, not “feared”, exactly. 😉

  • I keep on thinking about what was said after Barney Frank’s (was it him?) resolution to restart the draft.

    The word grandstanding came up quite a bit then.

  • Some more info below.

    Wexler…a Clinton ass smooching Moonbat. McKinney, elected by an Arab district. Serrano…dunno.

    Three Democrats, Jose Serrano of New York, Robert Wexler of Florida and Cynthia McKinney of Georgia, voted for withdrawal.

    McDermott went to Baghdad and betrayed America. Nadler, heh. All eight of chins should get a vote.

    Massachusetts….where the state commanded the legislature to pass a law legalyzing gay marriage.

    These brave folks KNOW their seat is safe. Not exactly courage.

    Six voted present: Reps. Jim McDermott of Washington, Jerrold Nadler of New York, Maurice Hinchey of New York, Michael Capuano of Massachusetts, Major Owens of New York and William Lacy Clay of Missouri.

  • Dave Nalle

    No, Ron Paul is a Republican, but he’s also a Libertarian. They call him Dr. No because he votes against everything. He was opposed to the war in the first place, so I’m surprised to see him vote against this resolution. But maybe like me he hates the grandstanding of the democrats more than he hates the war and wanted to send a message.


  • You know Dave, I don’t believe Ron Paul voted against it. In that, isn’t Ron Paul a Republican? No Republicans voted for the bill.

    I do know that Ron Paul is some sort of Libertarian and is well-regarded in that political community. Perhaps he’s an independent?

  • Thanks for keeping tabs on this for us, Patfish. I was surprised to see that even Ron Paul voted agains Res. 571.