Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: longnshort who wrote (329141)	3/19/2007 12:35:00 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1587571

Liberal lawmakers may sway key vote on Iraq war March 15 2007 "It wasn't fun…. But that was the right vote," said Lee, whose steadfast, almost anachronistic opposition to American military campaigns has won her the devotion of the antiwar left. After her vote, supporters wore buttons emblazoned with "Barbara Lee Speaks for Me." Waters, whose power-brokering and organizing prowess in Los Angeles' black community are legendary, is seen as the political deal-maker of the group. She too has rarely shied from controversial causes. Waters and Lee were among 11 members of Congress to oppose a 2003 resolution expressing support for the troops in Iraq, complaining that it also endorsed the invasion; 491 lawmakers backed the measure. Their views weren't always popular in America. They also weren't always popular with their colleagues. When Lee, Woolsey, Waters and other lawmakers began the Out of Iraq Caucus two years ago, they sometimes couldn't find a room on GOP-controlled Capitol Hill to hold their forums. In 2005, Republicans tried to embarrass Democrats by forcing them to vote on a Woolsey resolution calling for a withdrawal — at the time a controversial proposal. "You upset the apple cart, and people aren't all that happy with you," Woolsey said. Then came last year's midterm election, and Democrats swept into the majority on a wave of public frustration with the president and the war. Pelosi and other House Democratic leaders initially appeared reluctant to force Bush to end the war. As recently as the beginning of last week, it was unclear whether Pelosi and her lieutenants would include timelines for withdrawing U.S. forces in the $124-billion war spending bill. In deference to moderate Democrats wary of tying the hands of the military, party leaders backed off ironclad training and equipment requirements that could have prevented some units from deploying to Iraq as part of the president's troop buildup. But the lack of a timeline enraged members of the Out of Iraq Caucus. Woolsey and others loudly proclaimed that they wouldn't support any defense spending bill that didn't include a deadline for ending the war, raising the prospects that liberals would derail the spending bill. They got their way. Pelosi and other House Democratic leaders first promised to include a timeline that would withdraw U.S. troops by the end of 2008. They then agreed to move the date up to August 2008. Pelosi met privately last week with Lee, Woolsey, Waters and Rep. Lloyd Doggett of Texas, and appealed to them to back the timelines. The next day, the House speaker met with an even larger group of lawmakers from the Out of Iraq Caucus. Pelosi's concessions may not be enough to win the support of Lee, Woolsey and Waters, who continue to insist that Congress should demand withdrawal by the end of this year. But California's leading antiwar lawmakers admit to some satisfaction that their proposals — once mocked as far-out schemes from the nation's left coast — have become the mainstream. Single page << 1 2 3 4 latimes.com