The Vermont House and Senate passed non-binding resolutions Tuesday urging President George W. Bush and the United States Congress to "commence immediately the orderly withdrawal of American military forces from Iraq." Vermont is the first state to pass resolutions calling for the withdrawal of troops. Other state Legislatures have opposed the Bush troop surge, but none have gone as far as Vermont, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

http://www.benningtonbanner.com/headlines/ci_5223577

I totally understand politicians wanting to pontificate on every subject under the sun. Especially when it means really going out on a limb like this and taking a brave stand opposing a troop surge along with roughly 80 percent of the residents of Maryland. Those brave politicians. I'm hopeful they will hold hearings soon to help determine the true father of Anna Nicole's baby and then take up the subject of using Maryland's tax dollars to expand a NASA mission for manned exploration of Mars. Perhaps after that they can determine the appropriate baseline interest rate the Fed should use in determining international lending standards for developing countries' debt obligations. You know, since all of Maryland's problems are now solved and they have a say in what happens with international security, foreign and military policy.

I feel much better knowing we have such leaders working for us in Annapolis.

Anyone know how many of the signatories of this letter have ever visited Iraq? Any have an immediate relative who is in Iraq? Any ever even visited the State Department or the Pentagon to get a briefing on what is happening in Iraq? If even a single signer of this letter has done any one of the three above items, I will shut up.

Phyllis - my computer was having problems - could you please delete all but one of the entries above? I hate it when I see multiple postings of the same thing. And when you do, please delete this one also.

Thanks

Done and done

I've always thought that Pinsky is one of the smartest guys in Annapolis. This resolution and his statement four years ago confirm once again that he is.

Cutting and running before the job is done will ensure chaos will rule in Iraq.

Apparently, our gutless party leaders in Annapolis believe that it was fine for Saddam Hussein to torture and kill people by the thousands.

And before someone wails about no WMD's, which were only a single aspect behind our decision to invade, I assume you mean other than the 500+ chemical weapons seized by coalition forces?

I'm beginning to see the trend here...the mentality in Annapolis now is, "well, that's what they're doing in California", the most liberal state in the land with the largest defict and highest tax rate. In no state is the disparity between the haves and have nots more evident. Maryland should certainly aspire to California's values.

OK, so pull up the spikes and fold the tents...then what? This is a question that these folks aren't prepared to think of, let alone answer.

"It is a scandal to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on prolonging a reckless and futile war."

Futility will be ensured by the cut and run approach. The US military is not "losing" this war. Those that buy in to the Bill Arkin style media coverage and that can't stomach the relatively small amount of US casualties should ask themselves whether or not it would be better to leave an unstable government in Iraq to fend for itself or go back in a few years when it's an even more dangerous place? And yes, my rose coloured glasses wearing freinds, it's looking more and more like we'll be in Iran at some point too.

The troop increase is already in full swing and no Mike Miller, Mike Busch, Martin O'Malley or, that's right, even Nancy Pelosi can stop it. Boo hoo. Get over it.

It is getting harder and harder to write political satire with the dems writing it themselves. This is yet another, amongst many, bits of evidence that the legislative session is waaaaaay too long.

By the way, saying someone is one of the smartest guys in Annapolis is damning with faint praise.

More sour grapes and tired talking points from the righties on here. How boring.

"More sour grapes and tired talking points from the righties on here."

Translation: The righties are nailing us on every point and I can't think of anything to say. Wha-waa-waa!

Considering that your idea of "nailing us on every point" is repeating the GOP talking points from September, 2006 (cut and run? yeah, that worked real well in the midterms, huh?), maybe you ought to rethink the brilliance of your own argument.

Have you considered that maybe nobody thinks your tired rhetoric is worth the time to respond? Or that engaging with you or BG or gitarre is pointless, because you never engage in actual discussion beyond the slogans and the excrement-slinging?

Or is that kind of deep thinking too much for you?

I think the point here is not whether the war is a good or bad thing or sending more troops is a good or bad thing. The question is why in the world the Maryland legislature thinks it is appropriate for it to comment on international security matters when it has received no briefings whatsoever on the situation, has no access to classified or other information, none of the members have visited the region and even if they HAD done all of these things, their vote is WHOLLY inconsequential and isn't even useful politically because EVERYONE in Maryland is against the war. The point is that the legislature is a bunch of followers who just like to hear themselves talk.

I hope the legislature will also pass resolutions to end the suffering in Darfur, stop genocide in the Sudan and demand peace between the Isrealis and Palestenians. All of these are costing many more lives than the war in Iraq. And the gentleman from Montgomery County is likely to have as much effect on each of those as he is on the war.

But they are not costing us near as much money, money that could be used here instead of raising taxes next year.

Hey "Uh, Rufus", perhaps you should learn your history about mid-term election before you sound so foolish?

If you want to study a real political trouncing, review the elections results in 1938 as the country rejected FDR's fail New Deal policies.