Garrett reported Boehner dismissed Dems' nonbinding resolution as "nothing more than political theatre" -- but he had backed GOP's
On the February 8 edition of Fox News' Special Report, Fox News congressional correspondent Major Garrett reported that House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) "dismissed debate on any nonbinding resolutions" opposing President Bush's troop increase in Iraq, then aired Boehner's February 8 statement that a "nonbinding resolution is nothing more than political theater" and that it "demoralizes our troops in the field." But Garrett did not mention that Boehner apparently held a different view of nonbinding resolutions when he was majority leader. As Media Matters noted, in June 2006, House Republican leaders forced the House to debate a nonbinding resolution that established the war in Iraq as "part of the Global War on Terror" and asserted that "it is not in the interest of the United States to set an arbitrary date for withdrawal or redeployment of United States Armed Forces from Iraq." During the debate on that resolution, Boehner stated that it was "important" for the country that the House was having the debate because "[t]he American public deserves to hear how their elected leaders will respond to international terrorism and those enemies who seek to destroy our American way of life." He also argued that the United States needed to remain in Iraq:
Will we fight or will we retreat? That is the question that is posed to us. Some of my friends on the other side of the aisle often refer to Iraq as a distraction.
They have called Operation Iraqi Freedom a war of choice that isn't part of the real war on terror. Someone should tell that to al Qaeda. Let's be clear here. Those who say this is a war of choice are nothing more than wrong. This is a war of necessity that we must fight.
At Boehner's February 8 press conference discussing the nonbinding resolutions against Bush's Iraq plan, a reporter asked the congressman about the June 2006 resolution. Boehner said that the 2006 resolution had been "moved through the committee process, was brought to the floor under a wide debate" -- in fact a closed rule permitting no amendments -- "to allow members the opportunity to make it clear how they believed the conduct of the war was going." Asked if "it's not part of what just happens here in Washington," Boehner stated:
BOEHNER: No. This isn't about having a debate about Iraq and the need for us to win in Iraq, and it's part of the global war on terror.
This is over a specific tactic, a strategy if you will, used by the White House. And if they feel that strongly about this new strategy, then they ought to have the courage to do what the majority should do, and that is to put forward their alternative.
On February 9, the Los Angeles Times noted that, in December 1995, Boehner -- and 220 other Republicans -- "backed a nonbinding resolution opposing President Clinton's plans to send 20,000 U.S. forces to Bosnia to enforce the peace there."
From the February 8 edition of Fox News' Special Report with Brit Hume:
GARRETT: Pennsylvania Democrat and Iraq war critic John Murtha intends to prevent the president from deploying up to two combat battalions, due to arrive in Baghdad in early spring, if they lack sufficient training and equipment.
House Republicans said they welcome debate on Murtha's binding efforts to block the troop surge, but dismissed debate on any nonbinding resolutions.
BOEHNER: A nonbinding resolution is nothing more than political theater that means nothing and I believe that it demoralizes our troops in the field.
GARRETT: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sharply disagreed.
PELOSI: With all due respect to the distinguished minority leader, next week's debate on the floor is one that the American people expect and deserve. This is going to be a solemn debate about the most serious matter that comes before the Congress.
GARRETT: That House debate will last a full three days, plenty of time, Democrats hope, to force fence-sitting Republicans to actually oppose the troop surge. House GOP leaders can't say how many of their rank and file will actually break ranks. Current estimates run from a low of 20 to a high of 50 House Republicans who may oppose the president.















Nonbinding resolutions are a waste of time. Better to use the time for impeachment hearings. As the republicans have shown, you can begin impeacment proceedings even before you find a crime.
Right. It just proves they're not serious about ending this war. They're just throwing a bone to their puppy voters to chew on while they kiss up to AIPAC and keep voting to give Bush the money to kill and torture.
Troops! Home! NOW!
The Senate just can't seem to get their game together. And I never thought I would say it, but Boehner is right. It's either put a binding resolution together and get our troops out of there or stop wasting time. I still don't understand why these folks are so fearful of this administration.
Not only Troops home now, but Troops should have been home along time ago.
Atually, it was an interesting plan by the dems, but would not have worked. What they wanted was to have these resolutions that the republicans felt safe signing off on since they were nonbinding. Then they would put forth binding resolutions that had the same language as the nonbinding resolutions. The republicans would of course balk at signing those. Then you could point this out as republicans who were "for sactions before they were against them". Problem was, with the numbers from each party being so close, the republicans could hae philibustered the 2nd set of resolutions.
I don't get it... how did this item sneak into Friday's edition?
There were by my count only seven items on Friday, dealing with the "Speaker and the airplane" issue... why waste an item on the issue of Iraq, when the time could've been better spent writing an eighth "airplane" item?
Had R.S.K. a better sense of what is and what is not important in the "media" right now, then he/she could have devoted his/her time to writing an eighth "airplane" item for Friday.
I don't get how Iraq, and the House's schedule to rebuke/censure the president's escalation of that occupation, and the hypocricy of Mr. Boehner claiming these types of Resolutions as unimportant...
I don't see how an item summarizing this, and giving links to demonstrate the Minority Leader's hypocricy, and transcribing Mr. Boehner from both sides of his mouth...
I don't see why R.S.K. wasted his /her time on this, when what's really important right now is the "airplane" story (an eighth item for Friday? We needed eighty items at least on that story!)...
...and Sen. Obama's name, and the frat boys who are making fun of it: We need more stories about that...
R.S.K. could've been better employed on that issue... and President Bill Clinton's haircut, and VP Gore's weight, and "bigoted bloggers" and other stuff way more important to the American people than Iraq...
Somebody at MMFA must have slipped up, to forego an extra item on that more important stuff, and let something such as this House/Iraq/"Mr. Boehner the hypocrit" item get into Friday's edition.
If the mainstream media never talks about an important issue, then they can never lie about it, and MMFA can't highlight the lie.
It must be bad on some level that the media focuses on trivialities, but would we really benefit from these clowns screwing up important subjects too?
You are still not getting it. I hope more dems out there understand the importance of knocking down ALL THE LIES told by the media and the RNC. Keep pretending the other stories don't matter. Keep pretending average Americans can't be tricked into forgetting this whole party, not just Presidnet Bush and his administration, are the reason for this war. Keep thinking that whisper campaigns and push polling don't work on the average voter. Keep on thinking that these stories don't seep into the average American psyche come election time. Keep thinking that way and you will be where McCain was after his bid for the republican nomination, you will be where Gore was after 2000 and Kerry was after 2004. You will be where Max Cleeland is. On the outside looking in.
Did anyone see Boehner on MTP? All he could rant about was if the Dems were for cutting off funding for the troops, which is the reddest of red herrings.
Hoyer wasn't much better, but at least he came across as being in full control of his faculties.
I would have asked Boehner about his passing out checks (bribes?) on the floor of the house.