Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Iraq Vote Angers Anti-War Wing
WASHINGTON, DC- House Democrats voted Friday to continue paying for the war in Iraq but set deadlines for withdrawal.
The $124 billion spending bill eked by on a near party line vote of 218 to 212 with no "ayes" to spare.
Afterwards, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., — who voted against the war in 2002 — called it "one giant step" towards ending the war.
But Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., said the "emergency" spending bill was a "budget buster" because it contains more than $20 billion in "pork" spending. He also chided Democrats for setting deadlines for withdrawal and said they would have lost the Revolutionary War if they had controlled Congress when America was seeking independence.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., who voted in favor of the war authorization five years ago, disputed Republican claims that the vote amounted to turning tail and leaving Iraq in the lurch.
"It will not even begin [withdrawal] until a year from now," he said before Friday's vote. "This is not any precipitous withdrawal."
In an unusual alliance, the liberal anti-war wing of the House Democratic caucus joined Republicans in opposing the bill.
Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, who was against the war long before most Democrats turned against it, said the vote proves that the war now has a "momentum of its own."
"You cannot say you are for peace and vote to keep this war going," Kucinich implored his fellow Democrats. "If you want peace, stop funding the war."
The war funding legislation is now on a likely collision course with the Senate, where Republicans have said they will filibuster any bill that "micromanages" the war by setting deadlines. If these timelines ultimately get out of Congress, they face an almost certain veto by President Bush.
"This bill has too much pork, too many conditions and an artificial timetable for withdrawal," Bush said Friday after the vote. "As I've made clear for weeks, I will veto it if it comes to my desk."
He also taunted Democratic leaders in the House by pointing out that "because the vote in the House was so close, it is clear that my veto would be sustained."
Under the House legislation, troops would be pulled out of Iraq by September 2008. That was not soon enough for anti-war activists who heavily supported Democrats in the November elections, helping them win control of both chambers of Congress.
"We feel betrayed by Nancy Pelosi," said Medea Benjamin of the anti-war group CodePink, which organized a protest in Pelosi's office where its members tried playing a game of "pin-the-war-on-the-donkey."
"Today marks the day that Democrats bought George Bush's war,""she said as tears streamed down her face. "The Democrats are now as responsible as the Republicans for this war."
As the voting began, Capitol Police carted out of the chamber a protester in pink as she shouted, "Don't buy this war!"
Copyright 2007 Examiner
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
11 Comments so far
Show AllAs a Proud Member of Code Pink, here in Wisconsin, I am also Outraged by this turn of events.. Nancy Pelosi sold us out.. As a Mother of three and grandma to 6 I will continue to fight this War in whatever way possible.. I am glad Code Pink has the backbone to stand up the democrats !! Nancy Pelosi should be ashamed of herself for giving in... Myrna Ulrich- Cross Plains Wisconsin
as a grandfather from new jersey (now in washington state) i am agree fully with granfromwisconsin - you cant end the war by giving it 124 billion dollars!
shame on those who say you can.
thank you for sharing granfromwisconsin and montemerrick. I am a constituent of nancy pelosi and have called and e-mailed her offices the last 3 years pleading with her to stop funding the continued U.S. Military Occupation of Iraq with no success. Anybody that spins this Pelosi brokered (and bribed) bill as some kind of success is delusional. It has no binding limits and the language originally in the bill, as Pelosi had proclaimed in a made for the media moment, stating "Prseident Bush needed the approval of Congress before taking military action against Iran" was stricken pleasing her AIPAC contributers. I feel I made the right decision leaving the Democrat party, after 30 years, to join the Green Party in 2006-I wish Millions more would do the same.
Richard and Monte.. thanks for Your Posts and response. I am also a Member of the Green Party.. I have had it with the democracts as well.. It is time for a 3rd Party. I come from a progressive state ,Gaylord Nelson would be rolling in his grave to see what is happening here in Wisconsin!! We have a governor who is Now in China ,trying to bring so called "New business" here to Wisconsin, while Ignoring the needs of the people here! He is a democrat, and I did not vote for him either.. Add to the Mix, How this country has treated the veterans,not to Mention all the suffering we have caused the People in Iraq, especially the children ,who have lost thier parents and grandparents , Folks, it is time to STAND UP and let our voices be heard... I was and still am a activist from the 60's, and Now being a grandma, I am extremely concerned for the future of my grandchildren.. TO all I say, Make a difference, and do what you can.. You will be amazed how many of us are out there and outraged with Our Government!! Apathy is lethal.. Make your voices heard ! thanks for listening.. Peace.. Myrna Ulrich-grannyfromwisconsin
How does providing $124 billion to continue the war (including the escalation) get spun into a giant "first step" to end the war, especially with an administration that will ignore the suggestion that troops withdraw?
In 2008 we will end up having a choice between two pro-war parties, one funding the war and, as a result, Bush's policy while using words of protest and the other outright supporting continuing the war, including verbal support. Both options mean the same thing.
Congress and non-career employees should be required to have all military age members of their family drafted, trained as all other regular combat soldiers are trained and sent to the front lines until the war is over.
These people are, for their own careerist purposes, perfectly willing to fight to the last drop of my family's blood for their ideals and careers.
Immediate safe withdrawal. No funding for the murder of our children, grandchildren and Iraqis. Any vote to fund is a vote kill and maim.
I respectfully disagree with the above comments. Although I am fervently anti-war, and wish for this terrible war to end immediately. I also believe that politics is the "art of the possible," and that we must do what we can, when we can, in the legislative process! To have proffered a bill demanding immediate withdrawal would have been defeated badly, and we would have ended up with nothing. As it is, we have a very imperfect piece of legislation, but the point is that it will call Bush/Cheney out of their WarCloud, and force them to veto it--thereby gaining the outrage and publicity we need to get a good bill going!
Kate Madison
Depoe Bay, Oregon
on and on with the war machine and more prisions.its sad that americans continue to be so apathetic to the contiued bloodshed created by the LIARS-whatever happened to Honesty?
The aritice states:
"In an unusual alliance, the liberal anti-war wing of the House Democratic caucus joined Republicans in opposing the bill."
This is incorrect. Because both sides voted against the appropriations bill, it hardly means that they voted for the same reasons. The Congressional Progressive Caucus members who voted against the supplemental voted because they want the troops to be out within six months, not 1 1/2 years or longer. This is an appropriations bill with no real teeth, and the language that was in it about saying there could be no war with Iran by Bush unless he went to Congress was dropped too.
I hardly think the Republicans votes for the same reasons, so how one can say it was an "alliance" is beyond me.
It is now the Democrats war and occupation. They own it now.
it's called strategy, folks.
although it's emotionally satisfying, it's intellectually dishonest to deny that the bill that was passed was a step towards ending the war.
i've been against the war since before it started, i would like it to end tomorrow. all of us here most likely would. if i can't get tomorrow, my preference is that it end 2 days from now than 3 days from now. and, in the end, i'd rather have it end a year and a half from now than 2 years from now.
now, it's true that bush has threatened a veto of this budget, from within that context a vote to fully defund the war would have still been totally symbolic. either way it's an advance in the rhetoric of debate over the war to have a house of congress pass something calling for an end to the war. we were a tiny minority of this country 4 years ago, people. let's recognize this as evidence that the war mongers have lost serious footing in the national parlance.
i'm *not* saying to stop protesting and demonstrating. we have to. the reason we got this gain, this sliver of victory, is because of steady pressure (and incomptence by bushco). now's, in fact, the time to turn it up...but we should do so while recognizing that the democrats are no vanguard party. their business is incremental progress. i think we all know that, let's not pretend to be disappointed when they act like themselves. it's what they do, and i think moveon was wise to seize on the ability to secure some progress.
it's also of note that this article is from the frighteningly conservative "san francisco examiner." they're like the washington times of the bay area.
what the cons would LOVE at this point would be factionalization of the anti-war left. it would eliminate a lot of problems for them if we undercut the democrats right now, when the republican machine is having so many problems.