MAJOR LOL! STORYLINE : "House Rejects Dem Plan to Cut and Run" (NutMAX)

[jefferson_dem]

Get a load of this twisted account of last night's shenanigans in the House from NutMAX. A repuke introduced resolution has become a "dem plan"? Only in the yellow journalistic cesspool of the right wing echo chamber...-->

Saturday, Nov. 19, 2005 7:03 a.m. EST
House Rejects Dem Plan to Cut and Run

The House of Representatives overwhelming rejected last night a proposal to immediately withdraw troops from Iraq, after two days of over-hyped media coverage of Democratic Rep. John Murtha's call for a U.S. pullout.

In a lopsided 403 to 3 vote, Democrats showed they were unwilling to back Murtha's pullout proposal - even though many voiced support of his anti-war announcement earlier this week.

"Our military has done everything that has been asked of them, the U.S. cannot accomplish anything further in Iraq militarily," Murtha, a 37-year Marine veteran, said Thursday.

"It's time to bring them home," Murtha said.

Though the American media ballyhooed Murtha's comments as an indication that support for the war was collapsing at home, Friday night's vote showed there was almost no backing in Congress for such a move.

Only three left-wing radicals voted for Murtha's plan - Reps. Cynthia McKinney, Jose Serano and Robert Wexler.

<SNIP THE DRIVEL>

After the vote, House Speaker Dennis Hastert said the failure of Murtha's proposal "sends a resounding message of support" to the troops in Iraq.

http://www.newsmax.com/scripts/printer_friendly.pl?page=http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/19/70424.shtml

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

1. LOL LOL LOL Why would you quote NEWSMAX? LOL LOL

OMG, did you just hear hannity say the dems support the terrorists??? HOW DARE HE! LOL LOL

[jefferson_dem]

3. The humor of it all. That's all. They do provide such fine props

...don't they?

It's not that the headline *angers* me. It's that this twisted perspective is actually believed...and will be parroted by the freeper-types. This...is who we are dealing with.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

5. Oh ok. You should put a LOL somewhere in your OP header to show

you are humored by it. I thought you were actually offended by it, hence my reply.

Outlets like Newsmax are never worthy of anger, emotion, or serious though. They are there for the sole purpose of being laughed at lol

[jefferson_dem]

7. Point taken. I've changed the WTF to a LOL in the subject line.

Cheers.

[Arkana]

2. Wow, that's the most disingenuous headline ever.

1) The resolution was NOT Murtha's plan, it was introduced by Dumbass Hunter (R-What Else).

2) The resolution was not Murtha's idea--it was a twisted version that would have made anyone who voted for it look bad.

[Kralizec]

4. Standard spin. Don't be so surprised. This is something that should be

expected, by now.

If we haven't learn to fight media headlines like this, then we are no better than we were eight years ago, or before.

[jefferson_dem]

6. It is expected. We see it often. Still, sometimes, it simply amazes.

n/t.

[Kralizec]

8. I know what you mean. It angers me every time I read this crap, even after

so long of being aware of it.

[TahitiNut]

9. And 25% of Amrika will regurgitate this obscene lie.

Pitiful and nauseating. :puke:

[longship]

10. They should have all abstained.

This is how the Repugs are going to frame this. I knew that this was going to be a lose-lose situation. Vote "Yes" and the Repugs can say that the Dems want to "cut-and-run" without regard to troop safety. Vote "No" and the Repugs can say that the Dems support the president.

Only by abstaining could the Dems have sent a third message. It would have been a very Zen thing to do. They should have unasked the question by refusing to participate in the charade.

Now they are going to have to do damage control.

I *do* agree with the Congressional Dems that a "Yes" vote would have been very bad, but the "No" vote sends the wrong message, too.

[TahitiNut]

11. I agree that voting "Present" would have been far better, ... BUT ...

... I doubt Pelosi/Hoyer could have herded the feral cats. Too many Vichy Dems were gonna vote 'Nay' no matter what. No. Matter. What.

[jbnow]

12. That was my hope too

Debate and then walk out en masse.

The bill made a mockery of the whole question. Even in the debates the republicans acted like it was our bill.
It was a sham, a waste of time, pure politics in the worst sense.

[longship]

13. Walk-out == Not good.

A walk-out would enable the Repugs to twist the event to their purpose. Also, it would have been very, very difficult to get all the Dems to participate. Abstaining would have also been difficult, which is probably why they didn't do it. The "No" vote might have been the only possible way.

But the least amount of damage would have been to abstain.