Contact these turncoats...

[stephanie]

Every slimy Democrat but two voted for this...17 Republicans voted with them, I put their contact information below...Let's tell them what we think....

In this image from television, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Ca., gavels the 246-182 vote approving a nonbinding measure, a symbolic rejection of President Bush's plan to deploy more troops to Iraq, Friday, Feb. 16, 2007, in Washington. AP Photo/vis CSPAN)




FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 99
(Republicans in roman; Democrats in italic; Independents underlined)

H CON RES 63 YEA-AND-NAY 16-Feb-2007 3:22 PM
QUESTION: On Agreeing to the Resolution
BILL TITLE: Disapproving of the decision of the President announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq


Yeas Nays PRES NV
Republican 17- 180- 4
Democratic 229- 2- 2
Independent
TOTALS 246 -182- 6


Here are the contacts for the 17 Republicans...
http://www.castle.house.gov/ DE
http://coble.house.gov/ NC 6th district
http://tomdavis.house.gov/ VA 11th district
http://www.house.gov/duncan/ TN 2nd district
http://www.house.gov/english/ PA 3rd
http://gilchrest.house.gov/ MD 1st
http://inglis.house.gov/ SC 4th
http://www.house.gov/timjohnson/ IL 15th
http://jones.house.gov/ NC 3rd
http://keller.house.gov/ FL 8th
http://www.house.gov/kirk/ IL 10th
http://www.house.gov/latourette/ OH 14th
http://www.house.gov/paul/ TX 14th
http://www.house.gov/petri/ WI 6th
http://www.house.gov/ramstad/ MN 3rd
http://www.house.gov/upton/ MI 6th
http://walsh.house.gov/ NY 25th


This is the contact for the two brave Democrats who stood up for the troops..
http://jimmarshall.house.gov/ D-GA 8
http://www.house.gov/genetaylor/ D-MS 4

[jillian]

Gee... you think they'll be getting more positive mail or more negative mail?

Thanks for the info.

[TheStripey1]

Gee... you think they'll be getting more positive mail or more negative mail?

Thanks for the info.

If the polls are to be believed, I'd say they will get more unique positive feedback than negative...

thanks for the contact info, steff, I plan on sending them my thanks...

[Hagbard Celine]

Every slimy Democrat but two voted for this...17 Republicans voted with them, I put their contact information below...Let's tell them what we think....

In this image from television, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Ca., gavels the 246-182 vote approving a nonbinding measure, a symbolic rejection of President Bush's plan to deploy more troops to Iraq, Friday, Feb. 16, 2007, in Washington. AP Photo/vis CSPAN)




FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 99
(Republicans in roman; Democrats in italic; Independents underlined)

H CON RES 63 YEA-AND-NAY 16-Feb-2007 3:22 PM
QUESTION: On Agreeing to the Resolution
BILL TITLE: Disapproving of the decision of the President announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq


Yeas Nays PRES NV
Republican 17- 180- 4
Democratic 229- 2- 2
Independent
TOTALS 246 -182- 6


Here are the contacts for the 17 Republicans...
http://www.castle.house.gov/ DE
http://coble.house.gov/ NC 6th district
http://tomdavis.house.gov/ VA 11th district
http://www.house.gov/duncan/ TN 2nd district
http://www.house.gov/english/ PA 3rd
http://gilchrest.house.gov/ MD 1st
http://inglis.house.gov/ SC 4th
http://www.house.gov/timjohnson/ IL 15th
http://jones.house.gov/ NC 3rd
http://keller.house.gov/ FL 8th
http://www.house.gov/kirk/ IL 10th
http://www.house.gov/latourette/ OH 14th
http://www.house.gov/paul/ TX 14th
http://www.house.gov/petri/ WI 6th
http://www.house.gov/ramstad/ MN 3rd
http://www.house.gov/upton/ MI 6th
http://walsh.house.gov/ NY 25th


This is the contact for the two brave Democrats who stood up for the troops..
http://jimmarshall.house.gov/ D-GA 8
http://www.house.gov/genetaylor/ D-MS 4

You do know that this resolution was a protest vote against sending more troops INTO Iraq right? I thought "supporting the troops" meant keeping them alive. I guess you guys have been using "support the troops" as a code for "send as many troops as possible into dangerous situations where they can get maimed and killed."

[stephanie]

You do know that this resolution was a protest vote against sending more troops INTO Iraq right? I thought "supporting the troops" meant keeping them alive. I guess you guys have been using "support the troops" as a code for "send as many troops as possible into dangerous situations where they can get maimed and killed."

[Gaffer]

You do know that this resolution was a protest vote against sending more troops INTO Iraq right? I thought "supporting the troops" meant keeping them alive. I guess you guys have been using "support the troops" as a code for "send as many troops as possible into dangerous situations where they can get maimed and killed."

Its just more attacks in the war on Bush. They are playing with soldiers lives to get their way. They are a dispicable bunch of traitors. They want to deny the troops the extra guns needed to finish the job. I hope the next major attack is on washington and right on top of their dumb asses. They deserve everything they get.

[Hagbard Celine]

Its just more attacks in the war on Bush. They are playing with soldiers lives to get their way. They are a dispicable bunch of traitors. They want to deny the troops the extra guns needed to finish the job. I hope the next major attack is on washington and right on top of their dumb asses. They deserve everything they get.

By "playing with soldiers' lives" do you mean "protesting the president's decision to send more US troops in to be killed?"

[avatar4321]

By "playing with soldiers' lives" do you mean "protesting the president's decision to send more US troops in to be killed?"

No. He means they are playing with soldier lives by telling the troop and our enemies that Congress is unwilling to stand behind them as they keep us safe from harm.

When are you Democrats going to realize your actions have real life consequences? We have Jack Murtha conspiring to cut funds from the troops in an effort to pull our troops out of Iraq.

NEWSFLASH: The war wont end if our troops our pulled out. If our troops are pulled out or underfunded just because Democrats want to make the President look bad, we are going to see murder and slaughter that we havent seen since the killing fields in southeast Asia. But then Democrats like pretending they werent responsible for that either.

[Hagbard Celine]

No. He means they are playing with soldier lives by telling the troop and our enemies that Congress is unwilling to stand behind them as they keep us safe from harm.

Seems to me a debate in congress is a normal thing. I don't know what country you live in, but here in the US the purpose of the congress is to debate issues. We don't have a bi-cameral legislature so that they can be a rubber stamp for the sitting president. It also seems to me that the troops aren't doing much to keep anybody "safe." Last I checked terrorism here in the US was handled by domestic law enforcement officials, not the troops policing Iraq.

When are you Democrats going to realize your actions have real life consequences? We have Jack Murtha conspiring to cut funds from the troops in an effort to pull our troops out of Iraq.

The last thing Murtha is going to do is cut the funding that keeps troops protected in the field. What you're spewing is a spun-up right-wing talking point that is simply not true.

NEWSFLASH: The war wont end if our troops our pulled out. If our troops are pulled out or underfunded just because Democrats want to make the President look bad,

Trust me, the President doesn't need the democrats' help in looking bad. His track record more than does that job for him.

we are going to see murder and slaughter that we havent seen since the killing fields in southeast Asia. But then Democrats like pretending they werent responsible for that either.

Ha, you mean like we saw in Darfur? The Republican-run Congress sure did a lot to alleviate those people's pain. Or how about the deaths of the poor and black right here in the good ol' US of A directly following the Katrina disaster. You could really tell that the Republican congress' hearts were bleeding for those people. Man, the deaths of innocent people is a mighty convenient card to pull when you need it isn't it Mr. Conservative?

[TheStripey1]

No. He means they are playing with soldier lives by telling the troop and our enemies that Congress is unwilling to stand behind them as they keep us safe from harm.

When are you Democrats going to realize your actions have real life consequences? We have Jack Murtha conspiring to cut funds from the troops in an effort to pull our troops out of Iraq.

NEWSFLASH: The war wont end if our troops our pulled out. If our troops are pulled out or underfunded just because Democrats want to make the President look bad, we are going to see murder and slaughter that we havent seen since the killing fields in southeast Asia. But then Democrats like pretending they werent responsible for that either.

Funny, I thought Murtha's bill wanted the troops to be rested, trained and armed PROPERLY... are you against that?

[maineman]

No. He means they are playing with soldier lives by telling the troop and our enemies that Congress is unwilling to stand behind them as they keep us safe from harm.

When are you Democrats going to realize your actions have real life consequences? We have Jack Murtha conspiring to cut funds from the troops in an effort to pull our troops out of Iraq.

NEWSFLASH: The war wont end if our troops our pulled out. If our troops are pulled out or underfunded just because Democrats want to make the President look bad, we are going to see murder and slaughter that we havent seen since the killing fields in southeast Asia. But then Democrats like pretending they werent responsible for that either.

I listened to a campaign stop of John McCain's in South Carolina.... some dumbass redneck woman was complaining that the democrats were trying to pass a resolution that would prevent the soldiers in Iraq from getting paid.

now we are talking here about not getting them enough weapons or ammunition.

next thing you know, they will all have to write to their folks to send them bus fare to get back to America.

the fact of the matter is: even if Congress cut off all funding for Iraq, the boys would always have enough ammo and food and they would all get paid.... it would simply mean that team bush would have to pull them out from the middle of a civil war in which they are targets of convenience for both sides. No one would ever have to patrol the mean streets of Baghdad without enough ammo to do the job.

[Gunny]

By "playing with soldiers' lives" do you mean "protesting the president's decision to send more US troops in to be killed?"

What is the actual purpose of doing so? Telegraphing to the enemy that all they have to do is wait for a Dem President to put the finishing touches on snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?

[TheStripey1]

What is the actual purpose of doing so? Telegraphing to the enemy that all they have to do is wait for a Dem President to put the finishing touches on snatching defeat from the jaws of victory?

are you calling the quagmire in iraq a victory?

oy...

[TheStripey1]

By "playing with soldiers' lives" do you mean "protesting the president's decision to send more US troops in to be killed?"

that's republican speak for support the troops... just send in more... they couldn't do it at the START of the war, when it might have helped, gotta do it now tho...

[TheStripey1]

Its just more attacks in the war on Bush. They are playing with soldiers lives to get their way. They are a dispicable bunch of traitors. They want to deny the troops the extra guns needed to finish the job. I hope the next major attack is on washington and right on top of their dumb asses. They deserve everything they get.

can you show me a link where any democrat said they weren't going to provide guns to the troops? If you can, I'll send them some negative feedback...

but I bet you can't...