AP gets comment from Kuhl
This is all we have so far.
Kuhl, whose district stretches from the southern tier up to the Rochester suburbs, said he agreed with Democrats that the past handling of the mission in Iraq hadn’t worked _ but that didn’t mean it was time to reject the troop increase.
“While this resolution is toothless and nonbinding, it is the beginning of an effort by the Democrat majority in Congress to de-fund our troops and deny them the best protection and backup available,” said Kuhl. “I will continue to fight with every last bit of energy I have to make sure that our troops overseas are given everything they need to get the job done.”
So here’s what happened, from what I’ve heard (in the Washington Post, for example): when Murtha floated a plan to stop the escalation by requiring that all the additional troops be properly armored before being redeployed to Iraq, the White House was able to talk the on-the-fence Republicans into sticking with the White House on the anti-escalation resolution, using the usual “in for a penny (the resolution), in for a pound (the Murtha plan)”. They’re going to try to cast Murtha’s plan as “defunding the troops.” Even though its main provision is to armor the troops and gave them the appropriate amount of time before being redeployed.
Something to keep in mind: Republicans are very good at winning presidential elections and somewhat good at winning Congressional races, but they don’t know how to deal with Congress. Look at what happened during the government shut down in 1996 or how Reid beat Frist at every turn from 2002 to 2006. I expect Pelosi and Reid to win the political battle with Bush. Let’s hope that by doing so they are able to end the real war and bring the troops home soon.
Related posts:
- Breaking News: Reid schedules Iraq vote for Saturday
- Why I think Kuhl will vote with the Democrats for the anti-escalation resolution
- Kuhl and staffer on war: don’t blame me, I just work here
- Newsday says Kuhl still undecided, Walsh to vote for anti-escalation resolution
- Kuhl will have a statement up soon on anti-escalation resolution
Some one should show Randy Tim Ryan’s speech on the House floor. Kuhl is the one who supports sending our troops into harms way without proper equipment and armor.
His vote today is denying our troops the best protection they could have, which is to not be in Iraq.
Grrrrrrr…now I’m all riled up!
Notice the use of the word “toothless” Cute, really cute and wrong. I’m sorry. Debate is not “toothless”.
Folks, this isn’t about a resolution, This is about getting the debate started so it can be closed and our troops can come home. Something the previous Congress has failed to do. A Congress that under the watchful eye of the Republican leadership has failed to do.
What was that again stlo? What was that about the debate?
You can’t end a conversation until it is started. All the conversations we have had privately and publicly have finally bubbled up to Washington and there is a Congress that is in place to do something about it.
It is about the debate. It is about Congress checking a President that had led this proud country down a path to a place where we are occupiers not liberators. A place we shouldn’t be because it is against our core American values.
This resolution is the first step in ending this war.
“This resolution is the first step in ending this war.”
Much agreed.
Here is what John Conyers, my fav. D-Mich, has to say about winding Iraq down: “The notion that you cannot redeploy the troops out of Iraq without creating havoc and causing loss of life is so juvenile that it hardly bears comment.”
Too bad the House leadership, Pelosi and Slaughter among others, is running scared from this juvenile criticism from the right by supporting “full funding of troops” (Murtha) instead of challenging it directly.
Seriously. And I feel like they’re even running from Murtha’s bill.