About time for the GOP to push back:

“Republicans late this afternoon blocked a potentially momentous Senate debate, at least for now, on a bipartisan resolution opposing President Bush‚Äôs troop buildup in Iraq.

Forty-nine senators, almost all Democrats, voted to proceed with the debate, 11 short of the number needed under Senate rules on the issue. Forty-seven senators, nearly all Republicans, voted not to proceed.

This afternoon’s result cast doubt on whether the Senate would move toward a vote on what lawmakers of both parties described as the paramount issue of the day. Now it appears certain that more negotiations will take place on what war-related measure, if any, will be voted upon.

If 60 “yes” votes had materialized today, the Senate would have opened debate on a resolution sponsored by Senators John W. Warner, Republican of Virginia, and Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan, that opposes the president’s plan to add about 21,500 troops to the American force in Iraq.

Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut, urged his colleagues to vote “no” today, asserting that a debate on the Warner-Levin resolution would hurt the morale of American troops and embolden their enemies.

“What will it say to our soldiers?” he asked.

But Senator Chuck Hagel, Republican of Nebraska, rejected the notion that a debate would be harmful. The senator said he would have welcomed a debate on the war in Vietnam, four decades ago when he fought and was wounded there, instead of the Congress ‚Äújust going along‚Äù with the conflict.”

As usual Hagel is stuck in Vietnam and quite frankly I don’t believe he could give a crap what the soldiers feel. Hell it hasn’t stopped him from the day the war began.

But this is finally showing that although Dems won the midterms, they haven’t the muscle to go up against the President with their cut and run (and that’s what it is) resolution.

Good work base getting the message through.

UPDATE: Senator Lieberman speech on the Senate Floor last night here. A sample:

“This resolution is not about Congress taking responsibility. It is the opposite. It is a resolution of irresolution.

For the Senate to take up a symbolic vote of no confidence on the eve of a decisive battle is unprecedented, but it is not inconsequential. It is an act which, I fear, will discourage our troops, hearten our enemies, and showcase our disunity. And that is why I will vote against cloture.

If you believe that General Petraeus and his new strategy have a reasonable chance of success in Iraq, then you should resolve to support him and his troops through the difficult days ahead. On the other hand, if you believe that this new strategy is flawed or that our cause is hopeless in Iraq, then you should vote to stop it. Vote to cut off funds. Vote for a binding timeline for American withdrawal. If that is where your convictions lie, then have the courage of your convictions to accept the consequences of your convictions. That would be a resolution.”

UPDATE II: Qando with a take on the media b-assed coverage.