First the good news: Senator Jim Webb offered an amendment today that would require a minimum length of time between deployments for troops heading back to Iraq and Senator Coleman voted for cloture (meaning he voted to allow the vote) alongside seven other Republican Senators, all of whom are up for reelection [WaPo]. We applaud Senator Coleman’s submission to mounting pressure and encourage everyone to call his office and encourage him to help break the Republican filibuster and vote for the amendment (S2012): 202-224-5641.
The bad news: As I just indicated, the amendment was blocked by a Republican filibuster and the Senate never got the chance to actually vote on the measure. So while Coleman voted for cloture, we still have no idea where he stands on the War in Iraq and whether he will join the group of Republicans calling for a phased withdrawal. All we can do is go on his past record and, from the votes, it doesn’t look so good.
The DFL released the following information in a Press Release this afternoon:
Support for President’s Strategy in Iraq War at All-Time Low. “Opposition to the Iraq war has reached a record high …More than seven in 10 favor removing nearly all U.S. troops from Iraq by April.” [USA Today, 7/10/07]
In 2007 Alone, Coleman Has Voted Four Times Against Setting A Timetable for Withdrawal. In April 2007, Coleman voted against the final version of the $124 billion Fiscal Year 2007 Supplemental spending bill, which would begin bringing U.S. troops home from Iraq by October 1, with a goal of having most troops home by March 31, 2008. This was just the latest bill of its kind that he voted against. He also voted against similar withdrawal time tables in twice March 2007. [Vote #147, 4/26/07; Vote #126, 3/29/07, AP, 3/28/07; Democratic Policy Committee, 3/26/07; MSNBC, 3/29/07; New York Times, 3/27/07; CQ Today, 3/23/07, Vote #116, 3/27/07;, Vote #75, 3/15/07]
Coleman Supported President Bush’s Veto of Supplemental Spending Bill. On May 2, 2007, Coleman’s office released this statement: “With today’s veto of the supplemental funding bill, we will have another opportunity to send a bill to the President’s desk that will provide our troops with the funding they desperately need.” [Coleman Press Release, 5/2/07]
Coleman Said U.S. will be in Iraq for a Long Time. In April 2007, Coleman predicted, “We’re going to be in Iraq for a long time.” [Star Tribune, 4/22/07]
Coleman Predicted “Good Things” Would Come Out of Iraq Invasion. At an October 2002 news conference in Washington, Coleman “was asked about predictions that an invasion of Iraq would leave the United States and any allies involved for years. He said he sees opportunity. ‘There is no question that, if you come up with any circumstance, there are folks who will wring their hands and kind of lay out the litany of all the terrible things that will happen,’ Coleman replied. ‘… If you take action and you lead, chances are, good things are going to happen.’ Coleman continued, ‘Here, my vision is one where we have an opportunity in Iraq. … I look at the possibility of getting a secular government, like Turkey for instance, a democratic base in Iraq.’” [Pioneer Press, 10/4/02]
Coleman Didn’t Anticipate “Sustained Battle” in Iraq. “If we reach a point where we have to move forward, I anticipate we will move forward with all the might of this country,” Coleman said of the impending war in Iraq in February 2003. “I don’t anticipate it being a sustained battle.” [Pioneer Press, 2/6/03]
Coleman Said “Whatever the Future Brings, We Must Stand With This President.” In September 2004, Coleman praised President Bush’s handling of the war in Iraq and said “whatever the future brings, we must stand with this president.” [Star Tribune, 9/22/04]
First the good news: Senator Jim Webb offered an amendment today that would require a minimum length of time between deployments for troops heading back to Iraq and Senator Coleman voted for cloture (meaning he voted to allow the vote) alongside seven other Republican Senators, all of whom are up for reelection [WaPo]. 
Loading ...
Matt:
As discussed in today’s Star Tribune, Al Franken supported the war in Iraq. He now wants to cut off funding for the troops.
mikey, he wants to cut funding for the war which would put pressure on our deserter-in-chief to bring them home. You are being typically dishonest when you state he wants to cut off funding for the troops. Try something new, try and convince me how coleman deserves my vote.
Richard: The video is on Minnesota Democrats Exposed. Al Franken said “cut off funding for the troops.”
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/014615.php
the clip you posted is 10 seconds or so of a 7 minute conversation. What you took entirely out of context is Franken talking about the strategy of forcing Bush to either pull funding for the troops or agreeing to a funding bill with timetables. I stand by my previous post and would like to include my opionion of you. You are a pathological liar. I dare you to post the entire conversation on your nightmare of a web site.
Oh yeah,, and I’ll assume your incapable of convincing me to vote for normy. That might’ve been difficult since you lack any integrity or conscience.
Richard: You’re dead wrong. Franken was asked a direct question from a reporter and he said the Democrats should “cut off funding for the troops.”
Sorry, but what I heard was Josh Marshall asking Al what he thought the Democrats were going to do in September. Al said he thought the strategy will be to force Bush to either agree to timetables for a smart controlled withdrawl that wouldn’t leave the Iraqi people facing a bloodbath or force Bush to cut the funding off. What color is the sky in your universe? You seriously need counseling. The link is there, on this site, for everyone to make up their own minds. Is the full interview linked on your site?
Well bush said major combat operations have been over a few years ago so why would the troops need any more funding?
Brodkorb is just playing the semantic game since neither he nor any other Republican has a definition of much less a plan for victory. They only people left who thought the war was a good idea are either beholden to the Republican parties current leadership or hate all Muslims.
Nobody that supported the war or voted to allow the Bush administration to start it deserves any support during the next election cycle. They are all part of the biggest most costly blunder in U.S. History. This goes for Democrats as well as Republicans.
Is this the new strategy of how to take things out of context -
by the Brodkorbish louts?
Spin til it hurts - but it won’t change the reality!
Micheal,
You are such a tool, didn’t mommy breast feed you? I have visited your site and found it disgusting. Why do you post here? Nothing better to do? I would suggest therapy, or perhaps a real full-time job, maybe something blue collar. I heard Metro Waste may be hiring at Pigs Eye, you are certainly qualified since you’re already an expert at shoveling shit.
Richard:
He was asked what the Democrats should do when they come back in September. Franken’s answer? Cut off funding for the troops. The video is clear…
Here’s the transcript:
Q: “What do the Democrats do come September in the when they come back to the budget thing again-”
Franken: “I think you make the president, uh, cut off funding for the troops. I mean, I think, I think that uh-”
Q: “There’s definitely a lot of Democrats that are just not willing to bite that bullet, so to speak.”
Franken: “I think by then they will be. I think they heard from their constituents, from the people who elected them in 06.” (Talking Points Memo Website, June 14, 2007)
Cripes Michael, we get it. What a broken record. Is that all you have?
You’re a disgusting excuse for a human being, in my opinion. Please stop being such a immature troll.
How come you’re not embarassed by yourself? I would be if I was in your shoes. Where’s your “party of ideas”? I don’t see any bold Republican ideas anymore, and you cannot win elections by doing nothing but shallow smears.
LOLS “The video is clear”. Like any of us even care. You’d be better off pitching your crap to your base, at least they echo your every shallow pathetic thought. Loser.
Look at all the pretty lights…
Norm is great, Norm is good - LOL. At least we’re supposed to believe so. Don’t know what the Brodkorb quibbling accomplishes…
little mikey
The video says that and a lot more. That’s called context. If you had been paying attention in 3rd grade and not being so fascinated with how your boogers tasted, you would’ve learned that. What else does Al talk about? Does he talk about what a “smart” withdrawl from Iraq would entail? Does he talk about the need for an intelligent debate concerning Iraq? You have all the depth of a tissue and if you really wanted to be a serious player in the next few years, you will ditch this persona and adopt a more serious attitude about these issues. I’m just a working hump with about 20 minutes a day and I school your ass. So c’mon, convince me why I should vote for Norm and quit trying to smear Franken.
In today’s world being a U.S. Senator is almost like signing a major league baseball contract. Do you really think Norm gives a rats ass to what the citizen’s of Minnesota want vs. What W wants?
I’m just wondering why “public servant” Norm Coleman accepted almost 3/4 million dollars from the drug company’s since being elected???
People of Minnesota:
If you would like to see gas hit over 6.00 a gallon, continue your quest to elect Norm.
If we don’t elect Wellstone in 08 then don’t bitch about health care and prescription drugs. The time is here and now.
See the gas prices today? 3.40/gallon-for the dirt gas. I can promise gas never going over two dollars a gallon within 6 months after being elected. Can anyone else do that?
I’m declaring I’m driving the bus in regards to the only U.S. Senator that voted No to Iraq when it really mattered. With Wellstone the troops come home IMMEDIATELY.
I love all these replublican’s that realize the power is going to be in the control of the Democrats jumping ship in regards to the Iraq War.
Isn’t that what a “bandwagon fan” does?
Welcome to the race Andy.
I forgot to ask. little mikey, is that link to the full two part interview up on your site yet? I’m guessing not.
MDE has become so inundated with and dominated by extremists that even Michael has to go elsewhere for a marginally reasonable discussion. Any talk about the “war” on his blog ends up with his number one poster, Chestnut, demanding that the United States kill all Muslims. I can’t wait to see what political candidate wants to attach themselves to his followers come November.
Not to give any more undue publicity to MDE, but that Chestnut character is a piece of work. I just gave hima historical piece of my mind. Not that it will do any good.
MB does not do a good job of moderating his blog, thus allowing it to become nothing more than a site to blast Democrats as evildoers and undeminers of morale. Shame!!!
Mikey…
You made your little wish at least three times…
Now click your ruby-red heels and head off to Kansas…
In 2006, the Iraq War brought many GOP candidates down. It could happen to Norm Coleman as he continues to wear his blinders.
Since when did Norm Coleman start giving a rip about what voters in Minnesota think??
Norm will try to milk this vote for all the ‘supporting the troops’ he can get out of it. Most likely, he knew the vote would fail and he could use the opportunity to position himself as a troop supporter:
http://www.mnblue.com/norm_flip_flops_to_support_troops_maybe
http://www.mnblue.com/norm_flip_flops_to_support_troops_maybe2
But don’t believe it. Check out the Norm Coleman Weasel Meter. There you’ll find more details about his voting record in regards to troops and our vets:
http://www.mnblue.com/norm_coleman_weasel_meter
Great post, Matt.
The Big E