Denouncing a conflict entering its fifth year, protesters across the country raised their voices Saturday against U.S. policy in Iraq and marched by the thousands to the Pentagon in the footsteps of an epic demonstration four decades ago against another divisive war.

A counterprotest was staged, too, on a day of dueling signs and sentiments such as "Illegal Combat" and "Peace Through Strength," and songs like "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" and "War (What's It Good For?)."

Thousands crossed the Potomac River from the Lincoln Memorial to rally loudly but peacefully near the Pentagon. "We're here in the shadow of the war machine," said anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan. "It's like being in the shadow of the death star. They take their death and destruction and they export it around the world. We need to shut it down."

Smaller protests were held in other U.S. cities, stretching to Tuesday's four-year anniversary of the Iraq invasion. In Los Angeles, Vietnam veteran Ed Ellis, 59, hoped the demonstrations would be the "tipping point" against a war that has killed more than 3,200 U.S. troops and engulfed Iraq in a deadly cycle of violence.

"It's all moving in our direction, it's happening," he predicted at the Hollywood rally. "The administration, their get-out-of-jail-free card, they don't get one anymore."

Other protests and counter-demonstrations were held in San Francisco, San Diego and Hartford, Conn., where more than 1,000 rallied at the Old State House.

Legislation due to arrive on the U.S. House floor later this month will propose legislation requing the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Iraq by the fall of 2008, and even earlier if the Iraqi government does not meet security and other goals, Democratic officials said Wednesday.

The conditions, described as tentative until presented to the Democratic rank and file, would be added to legislation providing nearly 100 billion U.S. dollars the Bush administration has requested for fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, the officials said.

The legislation would be the most direct challenge the new Democratic-controlled Congress has posed to the president's war policies.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office did not provide details, but announced plans for a Thursday morning news conference to unveil the measure. It said she would be joined by Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., and other key lawmakers. Murtha is chairman of the subcommittee with jurisdiction over the Pentagon's budget and is among the House's most outspoken opponents of the war.

Democrats familiar with the emerging legislation said the bill would require President Bush to certify the government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki was making progress toward providing for his country's security, allocating its oil revenues and creating a fair system for amending its constitution.

They said if Bush certified the Iraqis were meeting these so-called benchmarks, U.S. combat troops could remain until September of next year. Otherwise, the deadline would move up to the end of 2007.

The legislation also calls for the Pentagon to adhere to its standards for equipping and training U.S. troops sent overseas and for providing time at home between tours of combat.

At the same time, it permits Bush to issue waivers of these standards. Democrats described the waiver provision as an attempt to embarrass the president, but their effect would be to permit the administration to proceed with plans to deploy five additional combat brigades to the Baghdad area over the next few months.

The measure emerged from days of private talks among Democrats following the repudiation of Murtha's original proposal, which would have required the Pentagon to meet readiness and training standards without the possibility of a waiver.

Gov. Rod Blagojevich today called on lawmakers to "seize the moment" and enact new taxes on business, lease the state lottery and borrow money to fund a massive expansion of health care, pump new money into education and relieve the state's growing pension debt.

Delivering a combined budget address and State of the State message to the General Assembly, Blagojevich said he stood with the middle class against business interests who have failed to "simply pay their fair share" of the state's tax burden.

"For decades, it's been the middle class and the working families of Illinois that have shouldered more and more of the tax burden. And while they've paid more, the wealthiest corporations in our state have paid less and less. The impact of this imbalance weakens our economy, burdens our families and holds our state back," Blagojevich said.

"And the saddest irony of all, the very people burdened by an unfair tax system, middle class families and working families were hurt by the underfunding of education, health care and pension funds," he said.

Telling lawmakers the choice was theirs to make, Blagojevich said, "To me, the choice is simple. I stand with the people."

“This is, of course, unacceptable. But we can make certain this doesn't happen if we act now,” Schwarzenegger said at a news conference after meeting earlier with legislative leaders. He said he is confident that a Superior Court decision Tuesday blocking an emergency move to transfer inmates to prisons in other states will be overturned on appeal.

The out-of-state transfers have been the administration's only plan to quickly ease overcrowding. About 360 prisoners have been transferred, far short of the goal of 5,000.

AdvertisementIn response to a question, Schwarzenegger said the new urgency comes from an order last week by U.S. District Judge Thelton Henderson in San Francisco giving the state 90 days to spell out how the inmate population will be reduced in each of the next two years.

“I think by having this order it helps us to speed up the process and really start negotiating,” Schwarzenegger said.

California has more than 170,000 prisoners jammed into prisons designed for 100,000. Inmates are packed into gyms, classrooms and hallways – sometimes in beds stacked three high. Officials are concerned about potential riots.

The committee voted 12 to 9 yesterday to send a resolution of disapproval of the president's Iraq policy to the Senate floor next week, setting up what could be the most dramatic confrontation between Congress and the Bush administration since the war was launched four years ago. Many Republicans voiced anguish over the president's policy, but only one, Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, a co sponsor, voted in support of the resolution.

While some lawmakers and anti war activists have dismissed the resolution as largely meaningless, senior Republicans and White House officials have worked furiously to minimize GOP defections, worried that a large, bipartisan vote would have significant political repercussions.

"In an open democracy, we voice our agreements and disagreements in public, and we should not be reticent to do so. But official roll call votes carry a unique message," said Senator Richard G. Lugar of Indiana, the Foreign Relations Committee's senior Republican. A vote for the resolution "will confirm to our friends and allies that we are divided and in disarray," he said.

But Hagel implored his colleagues to take a stand after four years of docile acquiescence.

"What do you believe? What are you willing to support? . . . Why were you elected?" he asked. "If you wanted a safe job, go sell shoes. This is a tough business."

But the committee's partisan divide belied the deep undercurrent of GOP misgivings, as one Republican after another spoke out against the deployment of 21,500 additional troops to bolster the faltering government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Lugar called the Bush strategy "dubious" even as he denounced the resolution as "the legislative equivalent of a sound bite." Senator John Sununu, Republican of New Hampshire, said additional troops should not be deployed until the Iraqi government showed more resolve. Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, said she opposed the president and was not afraid to tell him so. And Senator George V. Voinovich, Republican of Ohio, said he had delivered a tough message to the White House personally: "You are not listening."

"Congress has allowed this war to go on without anyone having a stake," said an exasperated Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee. "We passed the debt on to future generations. Nobody has sacrificed but the military men and women and the families."

Hillary Clinton thinks that in the increasingly crowded field of potential presidential candidates, she's the one who can best confront the nation's challenges.

"I am worried about the future of our country and I want to help put it back on the right course, and I believe that I am best positioned to be able to do that," Clinton said.