Al's Rantings

A view of the world from a hillbilly perspective.

Location: Virginia

I was born and went to school in the heart of the Appalachian mountains, in southern West Virginia. After graduating from college, I got married, and began working in Bristol, TN. I have have various jobs from Tennessee to up state New York and a few points between. Now I work in West Virginia. Some day, I want to live in Alaska.

Tuesday, December 20, 2005

House Of Representatives Vote on Winning in Iraq

This legislation, H RES 612, was about winning the war in Iraq. It contained such things as

(1) the House of Representatives is committed to achieving victory in Iraq;
(3) the House of Representatives encourages all Americans to express solidarity with the Iraqi people as they take another step toward their goal of a free, open, and democratic society;
(4) the successful Iraqi election of December 15, 2005, required the presence of United States Armed Forces, United States-trained Iraqi forces, and Coalition forces;
(7) , along with the members of Iraqi and Coalition forthe House of Representatives recognizes and honors the tremendous sacrifices made by the members of the United States Armed Forces and their familiesces;
(8) the House of Representatives has unshakable confidence that, with the support of the American people and the Congress, United States Armed Forces, along with Iraqi and Coalition forces, shall achieve victory in Iraq.

Good mother and apple pie stuff that all of the US House of Representatives can agree upon. This should pass with flying colors in the House...WRONG!

There were 109 Nay votes. See them here. This is unbelieveable!

How could anyone be against winning this, or any other, war that we are in? Can it be concluded if you do not want to win, then you want to loose? This is a terrible way to support the troops, by not supporting a resolution to WIN.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't think that the 109 members of congress who voted nay did so because they want to loose the war in Iraq. The Democrats wanted the resolution to be bipartisan but the Republicans told them that they wouldn't so much as change a comma. To me it looks a lot like that sham resolution on the immediate withdrawal of troops from Iraq which no one was calling for in the first place. Note that nowhere in the resolution does it define what victory in Iraq is. It was just an effort to muddy the water and embarrass the Democrats. That is why 34 representatives voted present and 11 didn’t vote. If the Dems vote yes the Republicans have forced them to vote for legislation with ambiguous wording so that later on they can rub their noses in it. If they vote no it gives the appearance that they are opposed to every thing in the resolution. The Republicans are behaving like bullies and apparently some of the Democrats feel that sooner of later they will have to stand up to them or continue to get beat up. Unfortunately, the tactic appears to be having the exact affect that the Republicans had hoped for. It would be funny if it weren’t so perverse.

12:15 AM  
Blogger Pumps said...

Anonymous, welcome to Politics 101,
and are you trying to say that the
Democrats never pulled any of this
"crap" when they were in control
of both Houses?....
Al, you have a new reader in

11:41 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Isn't it funny how of those 109 "Nays" only 1 was not a Democrat? That was an Independent (not a Republican). Whether or not it was a "sham" like is stated in comment #1 (anonymous), or not, I don't know. I do know it just once again shows how little the Democrats want to be involved and/or supportive of anything that will benefit this world.

It was acceptable when Clinton bombed Iraq...then pulled out as quickly as he went in (no pun intended). It was fine & dandy when various Democrats (Kerry, Kennedy, Clinton I & Clinton II, Dean, etc.) were stating that Iraq had WMD & Hussein needed to be removed. But once a Republican President decides to follow through with a policy made by his Democrat predecessor, all the Democrats become cry-babies.

How easily September 11 has been forgotten. Muslim extremist TERRORISTS exist! They exist in many nations. Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Pakistan, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Burma, Egypt, Jordan, Palestine, Saudi Arabia & the U.A.E., Kuwait. Shall I continue? I am not saying all Muslims are terrorists. They are not. I have known many Muslims, and soe of them are exceedingly friendly, kind, helpful, etc. These have the right idea of what Islam is supposed to be. But, just as "Christianity" has many differing views/beliefs, so does Islam. It is the skewed, screwed-up belief that has caused all the problem.

I mean, think about it. When Mohammad recived his "vision" in ca.620 A.D., America didn't even exist as a nation...yet in the late 20th/early 21st century, America is suddenly the "Great Satan". How could Mohammad have made any connection? This is the perception of a minority of Muslims, yet it is still a large number of people. These must simply be dealt with.

11:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Excellent, love it! salicylic acid rosacea Free world cargo pant corvette z06 vs lamborghini video tony stewarts lamborghini Cycling vs jogging alfa romeo sabadell lamborghini de ocasion 1991 mazda 626 check codes Subaru brumby 4wd Tucson medical insurance pornstars pinkworld christy Toy store child educational toy Weight gain seroquel car kit lamborghini replica Credit report from all 3 agencies

6:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Enjoyed a lot! yasmin asian buick skylark part Mature bbw gallerygallery Citizens automobile finance inc at indianapolis Knoxville center and eyeglasses Refinance mortgage non owner hiking vacations maine Valtrex dosing information Mercedes benz automobile parts Back of cartoon car

11:09 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Very cool design! Useful information. Go on! »

6:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Best regards from NY! » » »

2:11 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home