Jim Webb = Miserable Failure.
His "GET OUT OF IRAQ, NOW!" measure is rejected by the Senate.
By Mark Kilmer Posted in War — Comments (22) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Senator Jim Webb, Democrat of Virginia, is a dumb guy. Just sayin'.
He tried to push a measure in the Senate which would have guaranteed all troops spending X-units of time in Iraq an equal X-units of time here Stateside. It sounds nice on the surface, but it would strip a power from the Commander in Chief; more importantly, it would have made it impossible to keep the number of troops in Iraq at a level with which victory could be achieved. The Amendment was essentially a GET OUT OF IRAQ, NOW! measure disguised as something happy.
Pretty cynical of the dumb guy.
Webb and his Democrat bosses needed 60 votes to pass this absurdity. They failed, receiving only 56 [roll call]. Tim Johnson (D-South Dakota) voted for the dumb guy amendment, while John Warner (R-Virginia) reversed sentiments and voted against. Webb's measure was co-sponsored by another miserable failure, Chuck Hagel.
« We need more COIN in the Afghan realm — Comments (0) | No Helmets Required — Comments (0) »
Jim Webb = Miserable Failure. 22 Comments (0 topical, 22 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
That idea is just plain common sense. You don't run people ragged and expect them to retain positive functionality. The political cost of lost lives is too high for us to -not- do our best to keep servicemen alive.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
current time is between rotations to Iraq for individual soldier, on average?
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
Sen. Lieberman continues to be a reliable vote for victory.
It's virtually impossible to "peel-off" the required number of republican defectors with Sen. Lieberman refusing to accept defeat.
That just has to drive Sen. Reid bonkers.
***
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so.” – Ronald Reagan
I hope the citizens of Virginia take note of what their senator tried to do with this bill. They need to remember this when he runs for re-election.
He is trying to hamstring our troops and the president. It would keep us from having victory in Iraq.
The Dems are playing politics with our troops. I for one do not like this.
Thank the founders that it is blessedly hard to pass bills in congress. Bush should be preparing to leave (i hope someone in his administration is, it reflects very poorly on them to leave the next prez holding the bag), because I'm sure the Democrats will get their act together (after the next election).
Learn something new every day, it seems.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
I'm sure the Democrats will get their act together (after the next election)
IOW if Hillary wins the WH in 2008 they'll decide that following the Constitution is back in vogue. The President will choose her own nominees, she'll perform her duties as Commander in Chief, etc.
Their job is to fund (or not) the military not to determine troop deployment schedule. While the bill sounds nice it is unconstitutional. It's only an atempt to score points by making Bush veto it.
As far as holding the bag? The dems don't have to hold the bag. They can QUIT. TODAY.
Jim Webb .... this is the guy who claimed in his response to the State of the Union Message that "The average American worker has to work 365 days to earn what his boss earns in 1 day".
Do you know any full-time worker in America who earns 1/365 of what his boss earns ? I don't.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson
...and why did you believe him?
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
Hmm... Off the top of my head I can think of a couple of million people and you can't come up with one?
Let's see Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott made roughly $8500/hr in total compensation in 05. Given the average pay of an full-time employee of the company is $10/hr that's gotta be 1 million people who make 1/365th of their CEO's pay right there. Care to look at Target, etc?
I worked for GE under Jack Welsh years ago when I got out of college. I was an engineer with an OK salary but his total compensation was insane. He is a good example of why you must compare total compensation and not just salary. When he retired his official salary was 4 million but his retirement salary was 8 million/year. How crazy is that?
In Jack's case I didn't care about his total compensation while he was working since he had been with the company a long time and it was largely driven with stock grants and he kept that performing nicely. If I was a Home Depot employee and the idiot hired by them 5-6 years ago couldn't raise the stock price and lost market share yet got a $200+ million payout package I'd be pissed. Tying excessive compensation to long term (5 year) growth of a company is fine with me since spiking a quarter/year to cash out is easy to do, so make it worthwhile not to screw up the company. Guaranteeing huge returns for crappy performance isn't helping anyone.
Anyway, my point is there are millions of people whose CEO makes more than 365 times theirs. Just look for large companies with large numbers of entry level workers.
Can you think of anyone who, when asked to name their boss, would give the name of someone making 365 times what they make ?
If you ask the average employee of Wal-Mart who thier boss is, they will not answer "Lee Scott".
All of the people who directly report to Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott make way more than 1/365 of Scott's salary.
The CEO of a company is the boss of only a couple of dozen people.
If 56 people vote for something in the Senate that means they have a majority. A majority means there is > 50% of the people supporting something. Republicans blocked the vote.
Next while I would probably of not supported the amendment this posting screams of stupidity itself. Everytime you use the word dumb you hurt your cause and everyone's here to support Conservatives.
-----------------------------------------------
Notice to All - I am an independent who has voted for Senator Bayh (Democrat) and Senator Lugar (Republican) along with over 60% of my state. You may take what I say with a grain of salt at your own risk
This is very simple. To have been accepted, the dumb guy's measure would have had to have received 60 votes to bring it to a vote. It did not receive those votes, thus it was not accepted, ergo it was rejected by the Senate.
Perhaps I was wrong to point out that Webb was a dumb guy, and it would be wrong for me to say the same of you, but that is how I elected to post this.
Go sit in the corner.
Have a feeling that Jim Webb does not realize why he was elected -- total self-inflicted implosion of a candidate who was previously 16 points ahead in the polls. Sounds like Webb thinks he was elected on merit and that he has a mission to fulfil. Hope this type of arrogance gets him defeated in 2012.
Jim Webb has made missteps ever since he was elected and continues to do so. As someone said earlier, he catapulted to the Senate when Allen, dogged by a professional, Democratic heckler, finally fell for the bait and used the word "maccaca" -- a word that sent journalists scurrying to see if it was even in the dictionary. Talk about much ado about nothing.
The only thing I applauded Webb for was his stand on handguns and the right to carry a concealed weapon. His subsequent lack of support for one of his aides who was doing him a favor showed just what a boor he really is.
I'm one Virginian who hopes he doesn't see another term. Having a liberal Democrat and a RINO representing you is painful to say the least!
whether they would follow the Webb idea as C-in-C and guarantee that all troops will stay on base for 12 or 15 months after they return? 1) They'd never challenge them on it, and 2) They'd hem and haw about being unable to predict the future. In any case, they prove that the Webb amendment is purely politics and would apply only to Bush, not his (Democratic) successor.