Reed continues to point out that non-binding resolutions “do make a great deal of difference” as they are the first step toward decreasing troops and spending in Iraq. A partial transcript is available here at Fox News.

…WALLACE: Or, as it has been reported in some quarters, do you intend to move away from non-binding resolution and actually try to pass something to stop the president from continuing this troop increase?

REED: Well, our immediate attention has to be to the continuing resolutions, the budget this week, so we can pass a budget and move forward and not shut the government down.

But when we return, I think what you’ll see is efforts by both sides, Senator Warner and his Republican colleagues, to bring up this resolution, his resolution, others, and so we will eventually get into, I think, a very open-ended and free-wheeling debate.

The point I think, though, that we should stress about last week — this is not just about the debate. It’s about preventing a decisive vote on the Warner resolution which would oppose the president’s escalation.

And the procedural maneuvers that Senator McConnell, others, used basically frustrated that vote, that up and down vote, where do you stand on that. I think we should have had that vote last week.

WALLACE: But let me ask you about that. What’s wrong with Senator McConnell’s position, which is that if you want an up or down vote, fair enough, on the Warner resolution disapproving of the troop surge, give them an up or down vote on their resolution?

REED: Well, the problem I think, as I see it, is that they were insisting upon a 60-vote margin so that even though there would be a strong bipartisan majority vote against the president’s escalation, that would not effectively have passed the Senate, whereas other proposals, in fact, those that are embraced by both sides very sincerely, supporting the troops, would have passed.

I think they end of the day, they wanted to defeat by any means they could the resolution that Senator Warner proposed.

And I think, again, the letter that Senator Warner authored along with seven or eight other Republicans just a day after this procedural deadlock, suggesting they’re going to bring it up, shows that they really want to get back to the business of getting an up or down vote on the resolution.

WALLACE: So, basically, though, what you seem to be saying is that you were worried that their resolution, the Gregg resolution to keep funding the troops, was going to get more votes than yours and you wouldn’t get the headline you wanted in the papers the next day.

REED: Well, it wouldn’t be just about the headline. It wouldn’t have the — the Warner resolution wouldn’t have the effect of passing the United States Senate.

WALLACE: What difference does it make if it gets 54 votes? It’s a non-binding resolution anyway.

REED: Well, it makes a great deal of difference, particularly as the House this week will be considering something that might be very similar to that, and it would send a very strong message.