BREAKING: Jim Webb explains why we must Support the "Webb Amendment" and the Troops!
Download | play 
Download | play
Jim Webb made an exclusive video to explain why Congress must support the troops and pass the "Webb Amendment," on Wednesday. He asks us to call our elected officials and tell them to support this very simple, but important measure. It received 56 votes last time it was introduced, but was filibustered by the Rubber Stamp Republicans which included McConnell and Warner. You can read all about it here...Jim's website has a fact sheet also.
Please call and ask these senators to support Jim Webb's pro-troop amendment:
Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska)
DC: 202-224-6665
Anchorage: 907-271-3735
George Voinovich (R-Ohio)
DC: (202) 224-3353
Cleveland: (216) 522-7095
Elizabeth Dole (R-North Carolina)
DC: 202-224-6342
Raleigh: 866-420-6083
John Warner (R-Virginia)
DC: (202) 224-2023
Roanoke: (540) 857-2676
Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky)
DC: 202-224-2541
Louisville: 502-82-6304
Arlen Specter (R-Pennsylvania)
DC: 202-224-4254
Harrisburg: (717) 782-3951
Bonus - Ask Harry Reid to "don't let Republicans obstruct -- make them stand and filibuster":
DC: 202-224-3542
Las Vegas: 702-388-5020
via Senator Jim Webb (D-VA) today introduced a bi-partisan amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act requiring that active-duty troops and units have at least equal time at home as the length of their previous tour overseas. The amendment also sets a minimum 1-to-3 year ratio for National Guard and Reserve members and units.
“We’ve reached the point where we can no longer allow the ever-changing nature of this Administration’s operational policies to drive the way our troops are being deployed. In fact, the reverse is true. The availability of our troops should be the main determinant of how ground operations should be conducted.
“This is one area where we all as Democrats and Republicans should be able to come together. I would urge my colleagues to recognize this common interest and the interests that we share in addressing the welfare of our troops and their families,”
Let's all pray to (deity of your choice) this works!
Looks like all you Webb haters need to put you're hate on the back burner.
It's time to support our troops by getting Reid and the rest of the congresscritters to bring our troops home!
Robert Gates can go to Hell for opposing this
The vid isn't in sync with the audio.
AMEN!
Ani't going to work, but it'll be intersting how they spin it.
Here's the Amendment I'd like to see: FOR EVERY TOUR IN WHITE HOUSE, BUSH MUST SPEND EQUAL TIME AT ‘A HOME’
This is last hour's news. Harry Reid just told the ReThugs, 'Sorry buttheads, no compromise. 'Ya vote to support the President's war or else you vote with us to withdraw'.
No Bauchus bullbleep, no Salazar 'Bush Doggin' It', no Webb 'backdoor' withdrawal. It's on dudes.
Knife fight in the Senate chambers.
Go Harry!
I will make the calls..anything to help Webb..and the troops.
A.Citizen @ 8:
You got a link proving Reid is showing backbone?
While you're at it, tell Webb to vote AGAINST any more Iraq war funding under any circumstances. It is the only way to end the war. Changing the upholstery on a runaway train doesn't do squat to stop it. Only 51 Senators are needed to attach provisions to any funding bill.
"It's true that under current Senate rules, on a free-standing bill, 60 votes would be needed on an Iraq bill to overcome a filibuster threat. (Why we tolerate that only 51 Senate votes are needed to confirm nominees to the Supreme Court who oppose fundamental civil rights protections for all Americans, but 60 Senate votes are needed to pass free-standing legislation to end the Iraq war, is a question that deserves a great deal of further scrutiny.) But as we saw on the fight over the supplemental, only 51 votes are needed to attach withdrawal language to legislation that continues to fund the war."
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091207F.shtml
Don't get sidetracked. Webb already voted to fund Bush's atrocity without timelines and to allow illegal spying. Don't let him think you've forgotten his surrender!
to little too late...what happened to bring them home now?
btw tasering cops on suspension inn FLA
For those who cannot afford to make long distance calls, or get tired of paying to voice your opinion, this number has always worked for me. It goes straight to the Capitol switchboard, and just ask the operator for your Congress-critter's office. I'm sure our tax dollars are paying for it, anyway, so we might as well take advantage. :)
1-877-851-6437.
I used this number to call Smith and Wyden today about the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act, and got through both times.
Sorta' on topic...the State Department has suspended all travel by diplomats out side the Green Zone because of the Blackwater brouhaha!
You mean Reid made one of his strong statements? Well, his work is done then.
"In June Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting's Extra! Magazine wrote: "If the Democrat-controlled Congress wanted to force the Bush administration to accept a bill with a withdrawal timeline, it didn't have to pass the bill over Bush's veto--it just had to make clear that no Iraq War spending bill without a timeline would be forthcoming."
Democratic leaders know that. And here's how I know they know: days after taking control of Congress, on January 30, they invited five constitutional law experts to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee to ask them how they could end the war. Four out of five of the experts swore that the Democrats could stop the Iraq War just...like...that.
"Today we've heard convincing testimony and analysis that Congress has the power to stop the war if it wants to," said Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI). Yet eight months later, there's still no end in sight."
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/9905
Hold their feet to the fire...hell, throw 'em in if necessary, but get our Dem jellyfish to do more than flap their gums on the teevee while troops continue to die...daily.
I think this is a good step. It will bring some practical relief to the troops and their families AND force a pull-down AND make the republicans filibuster against helping the troops. In an imperfect (to put it mildly) world, this works for me for now.
Sen Webb is being modest about his military background. Webb has: a silver star, two purple hearts and two bronze stars actually. He also served as Secretary of the Navy in the Regan administration and an Emmy of all things for his PBS coverage of the U.S. Marines in Beirut. And has written six best-selling novels. A fine American, Sen. Webb. And a great patriot!
hanshiro @ 11:
I agree that while making sure that the troops receive enough rest between deployments is important, cutting the funds for this illegal occupation is even more important. But the key point is not that it takes "51 Senators ... to attach provisions to any funding bill." It is that it takes a mere 41 senators to sustain a filibuster in order to prevent a funding bill from coming up for a vote. However, it remains to be seen if these alleged anti-war Democrats have the political will and the integrity to make it happen.
No.
This is a criminal enterprise. It needs to be stopped on that basis. Web would have you believe that if the 'military' werent being harmed all would be well.
Well, it isnt. Massive crimes have been and are being committed. Criminal acts must cease. Criminals must be brought to justice. Simple.
I would rather have justice and no military to be honest.
It appears to me that Andy K was talking about this very subject yesterday.....cudos to you Andy...spot on!
MacDuff @ 18:
Yet, he votes to extend the war and votes to allow Bush to spy illegally. Citing Webb's pedigree adds nothing to his disgraceful voting record when the chips were down, particularly when he ran on the promise to end the war. The soldiers that died today I'm sure didn't give a rat's behind that "a great patriot" voted to keep them there. Maybe Webb's books can be used for "hillbilly armor" to protect against poorly armored vehicles that Bush has stuck our troops with.
With all due respect for MacDuff, I don't accept anything but current quality actions for our "great patriots" and while I honor Webb's service, it has little current bearing on getting us out of Iraq or, more importantly, Webb's shortcomings in keeping his promises or stemming Bush's insanity.
abarts @ 15:
LOL!
Well played, well played.
(still, I live in hope that Reid & Co. can help us get this mess turned around)
And:
I am reminded of how great it was when Webb ousted Sen. Macaca. Ahhh, anyone is better than a clown like that.
hanshiro @ 22:
I do believe the Dems who signed on did so with a sunset clause.....which is now coming to fruition.....time to put the hammer to them!
Earth to Andy K...earth to Andy K...are you receiving us...
bush and the gop do NOT support the troops. in fact they will only bring home the troops if they are in body bags. this is the sorriest and most delusional president in the history of the United States.
anon @ 20:
It seems to me from browsing over this bill isn't just about this current war in Iraq, but deals with the more general problem of overdeployment. That means that even if the war ended tomorrow and all the troops were sent home, the problem of abusing troops by overdeployments would still exist and would still be abused by possible future conflicts.
So really with that in mind, there is no reason not support this amendment. The troops need to sent home now, but we still need to deal with the system that allows the abuse of soldiers in the first place. There is absolutely no reason to hold the wellbeing of the troops hostage so that it might bring the troops home slightly faster, I think we are above tactics Bush would use here.
Lord of Karma @ 27:
What this does is RE establish the criteria on troop deployment...and in doing so it exposes the abuse the troops have been going thru........so I say GO FOR IT.....It's time the country(28%s) got a dose of reality
The logic follows that the war in Iraq is OK under the provisions of this proposed legislation. Caution. This may not be what it seems.
It begs the question.
Congress gave Bush authority to use force in dealing with terror. That isnt their job. The job of congress is to declare war - which means go destroy THAT SPECIFIC THING. Congress didnt do that. Bush assumed he was now an emperor and could attack anything he wanted - and he has.
Bush simply cannot decide - I want something different in or for country A and invade it. That is an international crime. Further, I would argue that Bush cannot act even as commander in chief without specific orders from congress - declaration of war on country X. He doesnt have that. I believe he is acting illegally on both international and national grounds. Isnt it apparent why terrorists are a police matter? Declare war on a country that sponsors - name it - but you cant declare war on a tactic which is what this moron has done WITHOUT the assent of the senate.
We very much need to be weaker militarily. That would force us to 1) THINK and 2) TALK rather than encouraging thoughtless rednecks to shoot first.
I have said this before. If someone comits home invasion on your home and kills your spouse, that person cant argue that 'well I'm here now, what has happened in the past is just history'. Its a crime. Even if they were to paint your bedrooms, they cant argue it was their intent to paint your bedrooms. It is still a crime. They will be removed post haste.
What we are doing is also a crime. We need to be removed post haste. One suggestion would be to convene a regional conference in SW Asia with the UN to establish a security and transition plan for what is left of Iraq. Anything that is done from this point forward must be considered a part of the original crime.
As a note - it is impossible to copy and past from a posted comment. I dont think I like that.
further clarification - it may be firefox. ^C doesnt seem to copy while Edit->Copy does.
Hmm
You can remove this post and post 31
anon @ 30:
yep....well said....one has to wonder what will be the repercusions of his acts.........althought I have to think(I don't like it)the next Prez will pardon him for any wrong doing.
But in an International Court....that's a different story all together.
now it wont copy - something is wacky. (delete after read)
seems to me alot of people are beating up on the Dems.....what part of sunset clause don't you folks get.....it's a give and take world we live in...and in particular POLITICS.....Now it's time to toe the line......if they don't push this issue then I'll join you in bashing the Dems....but until then...too me you look like concern trolls.
call your congress people and tell them...........BRING THEM HOME NOW, for good!
Oh, so Jim Webb means support the troops as in supporting the actually men and woman who are in harms way. Not support the troops as in wanting to blowing up all countries filled with non-christian, non-jewish brown people.
...wanting to blow up...
Um, hope this isn't a dumb question, but is there a possibility that the Webb "equal time" deployment bill would tend to make the war drag on longer?
little davey @ 39:
Not a dumb question......but I think the point is.....if we don't have the forces to rotate.....then we shouldn't be there......and yes to all the other folks....I am against this fubar war and have been since before it started.
mudshark @ 35:
The concern trolls sure are doing the Republicans job.
CD @ 41:
Hmmmmmmmmmm?....ya think?
Webb is absolutely right about this. You cannot run a military if you don't take care of the troops. Is this called the "Dwell Time Amendment?" Is that what he said. I support this amendment wholeheartedly.
The Repubs have realized they've lost and the only thing they can hope for is for the Dems to come to the middle.........hence the issue with all the covert trolls
Should we all get behind this? Another toothless bill distracting us from what we REALLY voted DEM for?
IMPEACH GEORGE II
why bother asking mitch to support this amendment? he doesn't even listen to his own constituents. i should know, I'M ONE OF THEM.
i would make a push on the other senators if only to render ol mitch even more irrelevant in his own party and make him easier to take out next year.
I love this guy. He'll make a great President one day...
Webb is as reliable as Reid and Pelosi. Someone else can do his phone calling--I've had it with him.
JB @ 47:
NO
This is a bunch of crap. Webb is simply the front man on this charade. Dems try to act like they are not interested in continuing huge war that helps the companies who pay their real salaries.
Seriously, how is this any different than the crap Nixon was spewing back in '68? Does anyone believe that any of these puppets is now going to stop a war they have done nothing to oppose for 4 years? Does that sound realistic?
.
IF AMERICA IS OCCUPYING IRAQ, WHY IS IT IMPORTANT TO BE ABLE TO GIVE RELIEF TO OUR SOLDIERS AND NOT THE IRAQIS PEOPLE?
IF THIS WAS A WAR, HIS STATEMENTS WOULD MATCH HIS INTENT. RELIEF FOR ACTIVE DUTY TROOPS.
BUT THE ACTIVE DUTY TROOPS IN IRAQ ARE SERVING AN OCCUPATION, NOT A WAR.
TROOPS OUT NOW!
END THE OCCUPATION!
THAT WILL BRING THE RELIEF WEBB SEEKS.
Just another Senator giving rise to keep the troops in harms way, just with better relief.
.
little davey @ 39:
You know what little davey? This bill won't just drag it out longer, it will guarantee that more U.S. lives will be in danger -- fewer troops less safety for those on the ground.
Webb's voting record speaks for itself. He may have been a good military man, but he has demonstrated once again that when military men get to Washington they usually forget that they represent the will of the "people" and not just the fighting machine. He voted to prolong the occupation, he voted to subvert the Constitution with illegal spying -- and now he wants us to work for a bill that tries to keep the military folks in so that they don't move out, "give 'em more time between deployments so that they're fresh for another day (of occupation)." [rhetorical paraphrasing]
Webb's lost my support a long time ago. He ran promising to fight for the end of the occupation and all he's done is present and support options on how to continue it. He should have run as a Republican.
Iran, Iran so far away. I couldn't get away...from a jellyfish Democratic party and ogrish, violent and bumbling Republican party nightmare country jamboree dueling bullshit solo.
Harry Reid and Dem. Co. talking about halting the US military industrial complex's galatial push into Iran is nothing but a courtesy reach around. Thanks Harry!
I will not drive today to work. I'm taking my bike. I want nothing to do with petroleum. I am so pissed that I am expected to believe there is anything honorable about US activities in the Middle East. Our country was built on the blood of slaves and Native Americans.
Drive to work, chained to the wheel? No thanks.
[...] John Amato: Jim Webb made an exclusive video to explain why Congress must support the troops and pass the “Webb Amendment,” on Wednesday. He asks us to call our elected officials and tell them to support this very simple, but important measure. It received 56 votes last time it was introduced, but was filibustered by the Rubber Stamp Republicans which included McConnell and Warner. [...]
MacDuff @ 18:
And he is Scotch-Irish.
Seriously, so far the democrats have not found a way that is not political suicide for them, i.e. vulnerable to "cutting off funds and not supporting the troops." There needs to be a first step that gets the ball rolling, a la "support the troops, cut the rotation." Then the DC clowns will fall all over themselves to up the ante in "I support the troops" by some other rider on bills. They can't help themselves.
For the "all or nothing crowd", i.e. left infantilists, fuck off.
[...] measure last July, but he now claims to be appeased by the administration’s token withdrawal. Call your Senators and demand their support for Webb’s pro-troop [...]
Even Senators like Brownback and Roberts need a phone call today (or a thousand) it may fall on deaf ears, but it is another tiny grain of sand that might start the avalanche that is coming.
Hopefully, very soon.
abdiel at 2:20, about Jim Webb:
"they usually forget that they represent the will of the “people” "
So what are we, chopped liver?
Do you read the polls? If Webb doesn't represent that will, who does?
You are tyical of the dunderheads who think THEIR OPINION IS THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE!
Desp[ite the fact you are surrounded by others who agree with all of us, you manage to claok yourselves in like-minded zombies who keep spouting your confusion to one another in a downward spiral of ignorance.
Don't assume to speak for the res of us. Yourr opinion hardly represents the majority.
Remember, THE MAJORITY, that "bigger group than yours" concept?
It must be nice, being able to live in a bubble. Like Bush.
Or is this one of theose Craig's list "volunteer blioggers"?
mudshark @ 35:
Grest comment, someone needs to keep saying this.
Those contrarians who talk like disgruntled Dems are more likely posers trying to be evil geniuses.
They aren't fooling anyone. Most Dems are fully aware of our party's imperfections, but there are more reasons to be encouraged than discouraged, despite the Republican Party's disastrous decision to defy the public will and continue enabling Bush.
Blaming the Democrats, especially in the Senate where they are constrained by procedure in ways most of us willnever even imagine, let alone understand without "being there."
I just don't believe it any more when someone tells me they are a disgruntled Dem, because their party won't fix everything overnight.
There have ben too many changes since November 2006 for me ti believe the Dems are failing. They are moving at flank speed, and everyone who fails to recognize is either a Republican with prejudices, or a poser of some sort.
Not going to happen.
Jim Webb's voice is sorely needed!
I am glad he's no longer listening to the capitulationist DLC.
I like Jim's answer to Frank Rich's question!
hanshiro @ 11:
I think Webb was following his 'leadership' then. He seems to have his own voice now. I hope he sticks to his principles when he votes. We'll keep watching....
[...] Crooks and Liars has the details. [...]
Jim Webb voted to continue war funding with no strings attached.
Jim Webb voted to expand wire tapping to make it legal for the bush administration to spy on Americans without a warrant.
I supported him when he was running for senate, but he seems unwilling to take a stand to end this war and he has lost my confidence & support along with Lieberman, Hillary & other war supporters.
[...] MemeOrandum has a great blogger roundup - some faves: The Newshoggers; Crooks and Liars [...]
BaScOmBe @ 63:
Well the latest Bill he's trying to get pushed through sure sounds like a good one.
SteveinSC @ 56:
Cutting the deployment time will only mean a need for greater overall troop depths. But I don't see a proposal for that situation. Where's the draft? Is that the next argument to be made, so as to make up for consistant shortfalls in recruitment so that our men and womem in uniform can get their time off? Make sense to me... SURGE ON!
JEP at 6:37 AM: about abdiel's post:
"So what are we, chopped liver?
Do you read the polls? If Webb doesn’t represent that will, who does?
Don’t assume to speak for the res of us. Yourr opinion hardly represents the majority."
My opinion about the occupation is the majority opinion on nearly all polls: The majority of the American people have decided that the Iraq invasion was not worth it, that there was deception in the government's push towards it, and the majority wants the occupation to end sooner rather than later.
Webb voted to continue the occupation -- contrary to the majority opinion of the American people.
JEP, what polls are you reading that show Webb's vote to continue the occupation as a representation of the majority of the American people's will?
JEP at 6:37 AM also states:
"You are tyical of the dunderheads who think THEIR OPINION IS THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE!
Desp[ite the fact you are surrounded by others who agree with all of us, you manage to claok yourselves in like-minded zombies who keep spouting your confusion to one another in a downward spiral of ignorance."
Um, dude, I suggest that you use the spell check -- I won't be cruel by making a sarcastic comment about "zombies" in reference to your status as a spelling challenged person.
Anyway, you are actually guilty of the very thing that you accuse me of. You say, "the fact you are surrounded by others who agree with all of us." Who are these "others" and "all of us" that you refer to? I say stop funding the occupation, bring the troops home, stop making bills that endanger more U.S. personnel lives, stop playing politics with the lives of those you claim to support.
In other words -- Webb is disingenuous and cruel. To vote for a continued occupation and present a bill that would leave fewer folks to continue it against a population that no longer wants us there is to me "a downward spiral of ignorance."
Perhaps all the "others who agree with all of us" are the 36 percenters who still believe that the occupation is "winnable," that the surge is "working," that the "will of the people" stands behind Bush's failed fiasco, and that folks like Webb who were voted into Congress based on a promise of ending the occupation but later, after winning, turned their backs on that promise, are just good old boys who are just now facing the wrongness of that promise.
It might surprise you but, 36% is not a majority -- it is a dramatic minority. You can't use spell check to verify that error but you can check a pie-chart -- you know what a pie-chart is don't you?
it got voted down 56 to 44.........who were the dems who voted against this and who voted for it?
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm... Heres the vote record.....
OK all the Dems voted for it...every single one......it was the hard right cons.....and of course Liarman voted against it
Don Davis @ 7:
Better yet - for every vacation in Crawford, he must spend equal time in Iraq!
Comments are closed on this entry