Clinton and Obama Vote No

Both Clinton and Obama voted No on the war funding supplemental. Both waited tell near the end to figure which way they needed to vote. Neither demonstrated any leadership. Richardson is looking better all the time. So is Edwards. How about Dodd. At least he tried.

If you want to read their self congratulatory press releases, you can find them here. Sorry Blue Girl, I call em as I see em. Right now neither Barack nor Hillary looks particularly presidential. I think I predicted this earlier in the day.

There's more: "Clinton and Obama Vote No" >>

John Kerry Will Vote No on Supplemental

I just got an email from John Kerry. He is going to vote "NO" on the Harry Reid Surrender Bill. I guess he wants to get out of town, so voting "NO" is all he seems prepared to do. As predicted, no filibuster. Just give up the fight, vote a polite "no" and enjoy the weekend. Here is the entire email.

Hi Corpus Juris
The compromise supplemental will probably be presented to the Senate later today, but I wanted to drop a quick note to let all of you know my thoughts on it. I'm voting against it. I explain my feelings in a post I put up on the blog Daily Kos.

You can read it here.

Here are the first couple of paragraphs:

Let's be really clear about the Iraq vote coming down the pike in Congress this week.
I'm voting no on this bill. I'm tired of the false choices of Republicans and all the recycled spin of old battles and the political calculations that do nothing for our troops who bear the real costs of this war. Bottom line: we support the troops by getting the policy right, and this bill doesn't do that. I've said it again and again and I'm not about to stop: we need a deadline to force Iraqis to stand up for Iraq and bring our heroes home, not watered down benchmarks and blank check waivers for this President. We support the troops by funding the right mission, not with a White House that opposes a pay raise for our brave men and women in uniform. Do we need to bring out the hand puppets and make the case again?

Thanks for all of your help so far in this fight. I'm disappointed in the compromise bill, but I'm more convinced than ever that we'll win this fight.

John Kerry

Paid for by John Kerry for Senate.

If you live in Massachusetts you might want to write him. Here is an address--John Kerry for Senate, 129 Portland St. Suite 500 Boston, MA 02114-2014, U.S.A.

There's more: "John Kerry Will Vote No on Supplemental" >>

Nancy Pelosi Does Back Flip

If, like me, you have been watching the Democrats in Congress surrender to the President you know that one of the chief surrender monkeys is Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House. Ultimately she is the House Democrat who decided to allow the surrender to go forward. Deciding what legislation goes forward is her job. That's why she was elected speaker.

Nancy Pelosi has announced that she might not vote for the portion of the bill granting the President everything he wants. In a craven act of pure political cowardice apparently she is going to vote against the bill that she helped craft. I wonder why? Maybe because she realized that in November the people told the Democrats loud and clear to get us the hell out of Iraq. Maybe because she realizes her district in San Francisco will probably never elect her to anything again if she votes for the Harry Reid Surrender Bill, the bill she helped craft and allowed to move forward. A true one and a half surrender monkey back flip. A real profile in courage.

All you folks in San Francisco, are you still proud of Nancy?

There's more: "Nancy Pelosi Does Back Flip" >>

When Does the Filibuster Start?

David Sirota asks Anyone Know When the Senate Filibuster Starts? WHERE'S THE BEEF? After all Russ Feingold and Chris Dodd are strongly denouncing the Harry Reid Surrender Bill (Er the War Funding Supplemental.) Surely the two of them could tag team an old Mr. Smith goes to Washington style filibuster to at least slow things down a bit. This morning Jerome Armstrong over at MyDD speculates that both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton will vote against the Harry Reid Surrender Bill. That makes 4 Senators to tag team a filibuster. I suspect that eventually all the Democratic Senators running for President will vote no on the Harry Reid Surrender Bill. That should be sufficient number of Senators to at least put up a fight. Jesus, if Senator Kyl could quietly stop the repeal of the Patriot Act provision at the center of the US Attorney firing scandal for months, then surly a bunch of big name senators wanting our votes and money to help them in their runs for President should be able to at least grab some headlines.

Any bets that they do it? With the exception of Russ Feingold, whose position is principled, the rest will moan and groan and vote a very polite and public "no" in hopes of keeping the support of the majority of folks who are fed up with the war, but in the end they won't do anything that might succeed or even call shame on their colleagues. Surrender monkeys are like that.

Oh you might want to follow that Sirota link. He has found and posted the old "Where's the Beef" commercial. A classic.

UPDATE: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment says it all. When does the filibuster start?

There's more: "When Does the Filibuster Start?" >>

So Veto It!

.

The Senate passed the Supplemental today, brushing aside threats of a veto and mountains of stale rhetoric and presidential pissing and moaning about Democrats determined to set a “date certain for surrender."

The Dems kinda shrugged and said “Whatever” like a parent ignoring a toddlers temper tantrum. (When my kids screamed "I hate you!" after I had the audacity to set limits and enforce them, I calmly replied "Good. That means I'm doing my job." Same principle applies here.)

From the Blue Dog conservatives to the progressive left, they said “No” to Bush's demand for war money with no policy strings attached. "He's not getting what he wants," said Rep. Dennis Cardoza (Calif.), a conservative "Blue Dog" Democrat. (emphasis mine)

The bill will get to Bush on Monday – and Tuesday will be the fourth anniversary of the farcical dog-and-pony-show on the flight deck of the Abraham Lincoln. You remember Mission Accomplished, right? (I’m guessing he doesn’t whip out the 'ole veto pen before Wednesday.)

Behind the scenes, the talks on the next version have already started, but Democrats are not willing to give any more ground than Bush. House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) said yesterday that putting the force of law behind benchmarks has always been an issue that has divided congressional Republicans from the White House -- making it a potential wedge to push next week.

The bill passed yesterday sets strict requirements for resting, training and equipping troops but would grant the president the authority to waive those restrictions, as long as he publicly justifies the waivers. The bill also establishes benchmarks for the Iraqi government to meet: Create a program to disarm militias, reduce sectarian violence, ease rules that purged the government of all former Baath Party members and approve a law on sharing oil revenue.

Unless the Bush administration determines by July 1 that those benchmarks are being met, troops would begin coming home immediately, with a goal of completing those withdrawals by the end of the year. If benchmarks are being met, troops would begin coming home no later than Oct. 1, with a goal of completing the troop pullout by April 1.

As the president commences the wailing and gnashing of teeth over being told “No” the Democrats are getting their act together and going on the offense. Democratic leaders in Congress are working in concert with Liberal organizations and planning hundreds of rallies, meet-ups and news conferences to protest the coming veto. Americans Against Escalation in Iraq is organizing what it anticipates – and fervently hopes - will be a historically large outpouring of sentiment against the Iraq war within hours of the anticipated veto. Planned events include news conferences just after the veto and "signature rallies" -- some of which could draw thousands of people -- the following day in about 50 places represented by fence-sitting Republicans lawmakers.

I, for one, am positively spoiling for this fight. I want to see this newfound backbone and resolve calcify and become a permanent fixture of the Democrats and obstacle to the Republican perfidy, malfeasance and flat-out hackery that have been the hallmark of the last six years.

There's more: "So Veto It!" >>