The Senate - barely - approved a timeline mandating (but, apparently, in a non-binding way) withdrawal of American troops from Iraq by one year from now. I have hashed this bit of nonsense to death, as have many others. The most ridiculous quote in the story comes from one of the more comical figures to lead a national party in recent memory, Sen. Harry Reid. Quoth Senator Reid:
Harry Reid said the moment was at hand to "send a message to President Bush that the time has come to find a new way forward in this intractable war."
You're a bit late. Mr. Bush has already heard that message, and has decided that attempting to stabilize the situation and support the young Iraqi democracy, rather than running away and leaving the sheep to the wolves, would be a better way forward. And it seems that's the case, so far. What you seem to want, Senator, is to face forward but backpedal furiously.
A couple of adults had differing views.
John McCain, R-Ariz., a presidential hopeful, said that "we are starting to turn things around" in the Iraq war" and that a timeline for withdrawal would embolden the terrorists in Iraq and elsewhere.
The effect of the timeline would be to "snatch defeat from the jaws of progress in Iraq," agreed Lieberman, who won a new term last fall in a three-way race after losing the Democratic nomination to an anti-war insurgent.
I love the characterization of Ned Lamont as an "anti-war insurgent" by the AP. Priceless. My biggest disappointment? The weathervane Senator, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, who flipped on the issue denying VP Dick Cheney the chance to break the tie. Spineless. Senator Hagel made news recently opining that President Bush should be impeached for not heeding the opinion of the American people in matters of war. I guess the principle is that at any given point a President should regard national security and matters of war as a open to referendum, and not a matter for himself and his military and foreign policy advisors. Congratulations, sir, you too have disqualified yourself from the Presidency, just like Gov. Vilsack and Senator Reid before you.
I'll finish with another amusing quote, from the Bay State's resident comic, Senator Kerry, discussing the earlier vote that went against the "run away crowd."
A resolution calling for a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq pushed by Senate Democrats failed to win the majority of votes last week. Nonetheless, Sen. John Kerry, Massachusetts Democrat, one of the resolution's co-authors, told "Fox News Sunday" the 48-vote total was a positive development. It would have needed 60 to overcome procedural hurdles and move to a vote on the resolution itself.
"Last summer when I brought that resolution to the floor, I got 13 votes. Forty-eight to 13. That is an enormous change in a very short time," Mr. Kerry said. "And what we've learned in the great fights of the Senate and historically in this country is you have to keep fighting. You keep trying."
Wouldn't it be awesome if he were willing to "keep fighting...keep trying" in the actual fight, as opposed to the struggle to achieve surrender?
3/28/07 0915: Others on the topic include Captain Ed:
I could go on and on about the many stupidities in this approach, but it won't do much good. We can talk about how giving timetables only emboldens the enemy to persevere and to keep their powder dry. I could point out the folly of having a rump force remain behind to fight only al-Qaeda -- as if they wear uniforms and our troops have the time to determine whether AQI or native insurgents are attacking them before responding.
And about Senator Hagel ...
One thing is certain: Chuck Hagel can skip the exploratory committee for the 2008 race.
From Curt at Flopping Aces, who feels that the Democrats, by including so much vote buying pork, are treading on dangerous ground:
So either the Democrats put up a bill that funds our troops, with NO conditions, or they will be blamed from all sides for putting our soldiers into even more danger with no funds to support them. It's a game of chicken apparently and my money is on Bush.
Yeah, but the media will do everything it can to prevent the blame for problems from falling on the Democrats. See, it's starting already.
Dems: Bush must accept Iraq timetable
WASHINGTON - Congressional Democrats are showing no signs of backing down on their rebuke of the Iraq War, insisting President Bush will have to accept some sort of legislative timetable in exchange for the billions of dollars needed to fund the war.
"We would hope that the president understands how serious we are," said Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., after the Senate voted to uphold a proposal in a war spending bill calling for the troop withdrawal.
Notice: Bush's comments, and those of his supporters, are about the war, the country, and national security. The critics comments are about Bush, and the battle for the legislature.
That sums it up. Notice further, these are the comments they are making of their own free will. We are not imagining what they might be thinking nor interpreting it. This is what (most) elected Democrats are saying.
Posted by: Assistant Village Idiot | Mar 28, 2007 at 02:10 PM
You're right, and it's fairly remarkable. The Democratic Congress is acting as if the President (and, as a result, the Constitution) is/are no longer relevant, as if they were somehow granted "supreme executive power," to quote Dennis the Peasant from MPHG, by virtue of having gained a slim majority in the house and a razor thin majority in the Senate. This seems as if it's more about putting Bush in his place than anything else.
Posted by: Giacomo | Mar 28, 2007 at 04:04 PM