Iraq resolution debate

No school today or tomorrow, so I've got C-Span on, watching the debate on the Warner-Nelson non-binding resolution on Iraq. The political maneuverings are up front and on display. Sherrod Brown, our new senator, was presiding as acting senate president pro tem today for awhile. According to Wikipedia, new senators from the majority party are assigned this task to get them up to speed in parliamentary procedures.

Lieberman just got smacked down by John Warner, who noted that he was discussing the McCain -Lieberman proposal while the subject at hand was the Warner bill. In fact, the McCain-Lieberman bill has not even been filed yet and isn't on the record, so shut up Joe!

A NYT editorial today has a bleak assessment on Iraq, noting that the one province which has been given control over its security failed to deal with an uprising and had to call in American forces to assist. News over the past few days has been exceptionally bloody. Anyone who keeps insisting Bush deserves yet another chance at botching things in Iraq is either delusional or willing to stand in line for Kool-aid.

Now it is looking like a group of Republicans are working to block an up and down vote on any of the Iraq ammendments. Guess they need more time to study the Iraq Study Group report. May they all rot in loser hell at the next election cycle and may the lives of both US soldiers and Iraqi citizens weigh heavy on their consciences.

They are voting as I type to decide whether to proceed with debate -- 60 votes needed. You can't see a running tally of votes -- you'd think in this day and age, something could be rigged up for visual display.

I guess the Republicans voting against this don't want to debate on the record, but by voting against debate -- they have put themselves on the record -- as being obstuctionists who choose to go against the will of the people.