Senate votes not to debate Iraq proposal

[Naturalized-Texan]

Senate votes not to debate Iraq proposal (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyID=2007-02-05T231144Z_01_N05370384_RTRUKOC_0_US-IRAQ-USA-CONGRESS-VOTE.xml&WTmodLoc=NewsHome-C3-politicsNews-2)

A bipartisan resolution repudiating President George W. Bush's decision to send 21,500 more troops to Iraq failed to advance in the U.S. Senate on Monday, dealing a serious setback to critics of the war.

The resolution needed 60 votes before the 100-member Senate could begin debate, but it got 49...

[Irish Mom]

Finally . . the Republicans grew a wee little back bone. ;)

[Pendragon_6]

By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Senior Editor
February 06, 2007

(CNSNews.com) - Democrats may control the Senate, but they don't always get their way, as events proved on Monday.

Senate Democrats, eager to blast President Bush's plan to send 21,000 additional troops to Iraq, wanted to pass a nonbinding resolution criticizing the so-called troop surge.

But on Monday, Republicans blocked Democrats from doing so. The Senate vote to cut off debate was only 49-47; 60 votes were needed to allow a vote on the resolution itself.

Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean was not happy about it.


CNS News (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200702/POL20070206d.html)

[Rhino]

Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean was not happy about it.I feel his pain. LOL!

[Pennville_Bill]

NOTE to Harry Reid: How's it feel to be on the receiving end of the stick, you pompous little prig?

[Rhino]

Threads merged.

[DesertFox]

Prig? Howie Dean? :lol:

[BEST45CAL]

'Bout damn time they stood up to the dimz. If the senate 'pubz can maintain this posture, they can block a lot of dim crap that will be coming from the house.