Senate Democrats Consider New Approach to Iraq

By TChris, Section War In Iraq
Posted on Fri Feb 23, 2007 at 01:13:16 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Senate Republicans blocked a nonbinding resolution opposing the president's escalation of the war in Iraq. Senate Democrats have turned their attention to legislation that takes a more direct approach:

Key lawmakers, backed by party leaders, are drafting legislation that would effectively revoke the broad authority granted to the president in the days Saddam Hussein was in power, and leave U.S. troops with a limited mission as they prepare to withdraw.
Officials said Thursday the precise wording of the measure remains unsettled. One version would restrict American troops in Iraq to fighting al-Qaeda, training Iraqi army and police forces, maintaining Iraq's territorial integrity and otherwise proceeding with the withdrawal of combat forces.

The legislation would probably suffer a death by filibuster, and if it passed, would certainly be vetoed. Keeping pressure on Republicans and the White House to change the course of the failed, costly, and unpopular war is nonetheless a worthy end in itself. Senate obstructionists who face reelection in 2008 will have difficulty explaining why they should keep their jobs.

< Vilsack Drops Out | CA Spanking Bill Dies >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Senate Democrats Consider New Approach to Iraq | 13 comments (13 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

I think you're right, TChris (none / 0) (#1)
by Edger on Fri Feb 23, 2007 at 02:20:06 PM EST

The legislation would probably suffer a death by filibuster, and if it passed, would certainly be vetoed.

But at some point they have to stand up and face the storm of attacks and epithets the rethugs will surely engage in as loudly as possible, though, and do the right thing.

They have enough support across the country for it, and the rethugs will make themselves look as crazed and delusionally detached from reality as they really are, I think.

They should do it even if the only result (none / 0) (#2)
by bx58 on Fri Feb 23, 2007 at 03:33:28 PM EST

is to send Holy Joe Lieberman scurrying over to the right side of the aisle. Enough of him acting like an independent already.

Cutting off your nose to spite your face. (none / 0) (#3)
by jimakaPPJ on Fri Feb 23, 2007 at 06:20:12 PM EST

When he goes the Senate reverts to Repub control..


: So they switch seats and hand (none / 0) (#4)
by bx58 on Fri Feb 23, 2007 at 07:22:47 PM EST

the gavel to some other stuffed shirt.
And TL nominee Hillary plays this excruciating game with her vote on the Iraq war. Does she have her finger in the air or what?
How deepseated is the disgust with our meddling in the Middle East among traditional democrats and how far can she push the "liberal" deep-pocket Zionists who are backing her?
Screw it... Obama-Biden!

: Actually (none / 0) (#11)
by glanton on Sat Feb 24, 2007 at 11:54:46 AM EST

The Chairs/Gavels would be split. Less power for the Democrats right now but arguably well worth it to nix Joe's efforts to control the party agenda.
Any sane person would recognize it's pretty silly for all Congressional measures to be drafted in hopes to keep Lieberman from feeling--gasp!--"uncomfortable." Joe uncomfortable? The horrors!
Why doesn't Joe be a man and either stay or go? The blackmail, the veiled threats are very unbecoming and show a dearth of human decency, even by Congressional standards.
At any rate, look at which Senate seats are up in 2008. Whether they can win the White House or not the Democrats look poised to expand their lead in the Senate come 2008.

Sometimes Doing The Right Thing is Good Politics (none / 0) (#5)
by john horse on Sat Feb 24, 2007 at 06:01:25 AM EST

As TChris points out ending Bush's misadventure in Iraq is not only the right thing to do but is also good politics as support for this war continues to plummet.

I think the Democrats have the right approach. By forcing the GOP to take a stand against mildly antiwar legislation like the nonbinding resolution, they help build popular support for stronger antiwar measures.

Take the blame (none / 0) (#7)
by jimakaPPJ on Sat Feb 24, 2007 at 10:08:16 AM EST

Dark Avenger evidently has missed the poll showing that 66% of Americans think a victory in Iraq is somewhat or very important.

And 58% are very or somewhat hopeful we win.

(57% of Democrats are NOT hopeful we win.)

Guess who is gonna take the blame if we lose?

And guess what a forced withdrawal by the Demos will be seen as?

The Demos aren't whistling past the graveyard. They are in it, digging their own political graves.

the poll is BS (none / 0) (#8)
by Sailor on Sat Feb 24, 2007 at 10:36:08 AM EST

The wording is specious, non-neutral and calculated to give the result the pollers wanted. There was no mention of methodology and the spurious link was to an editorial of wrongwinging, warmongering chickhawks.

here are real polls:
USA Today/Gallup poll conducted February 9-11 found that 60 percent of Americans oppose President Bush's proposal to "increase the number of U.S. troops in Iraq," 51 percent favor "Congress passing a non-binding resolution to express its disapproval of Bush's plan to send more U.S. troops to Iraq," and 56 percent "think the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq."

Associated Press/Ipsos poll conducted February 12-15, 63 percent of Americans "oppose sending more troops to Iraq," 56 percent think the war is "a hopeless cause," and 64 percent think that increasing American troops in Iraq would not "help stabilize the situation there."

CBS News poll conducted February 8-11 found that 63 percent of Americans "disapprove of President Bush's plan to send more than 20,000 additional U.S. troops to Iraq" and that 72 percent say the war in Iraq is going "badly."

Pew Research Center for the People and the Press survey, conducted February 7-11, reported that 54 percent of the American public think that going to war in Iraq was the "[w]rong decision," 67 percent "say things are not going well with the U.S. military effort in Iraq," and 63 percent "oppose[s] the 'troop surge' plan."


Wrong. (none / 0) (#9)
by jimakaPPJ on Sat Feb 24, 2007 at 11:03:00 AM EST

And speaking of accuracy:

Results are based on telephone interviews with 1,006 National Adults, aged 18+,

No weighing for political party?

And then:

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

But here is were your trouble is. This is what the American people will come to see:

"We're trying to force a redeployment not by taking money away, (but) by redirecting money," explained Murtha.
As we've noted on several occasions, Democratic talk of "redeployment" has encouraged terrorist groups around the world.
Jihad Jaara, a senior member of the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, said before the 2006 vote: "Americans should vote Democratic," adding that "it is time the American people support those who want to take them out of the Iraqi mud." The statement could have come from Murtha, Kerry, Hillary or any number of Democrats.

Live with it. And expect to have the loss and the deaths of millions hung around Demo necks.


Hard to hang (none / 0) (#10)
by glanton on Sat Feb 24, 2007 at 11:46:16 AM EST

These deaths around the Democratic necks, incompetent though their "opposition" has undoubtedly been. People can throw around wtavere polls they want but the fact is, it is all pinned on Republicans in the public mind.

You may think this unfair, Jim. Most conservative pundits certainly do. Unfair, that is, that the Iraq misadventure is thoroughly conceived in the public mind as a Bush thing. More importantly, a Republican thing. Not a bipartisan thing. Not an American thing. But a Republican thing. This despite Democratic authorization in 2002.

What has happened, what is happening now, whatever happens in the future re Iraq will be tagged squarely on the Republican mantle.

Of course it will come as no surprise to you that I think this entirely fair. Being weak in opposing it is not at all the same level of complicity as starting it, after all.

And while I like many have a lot of issues with our current electorate, I'm pretty confident that at their gut level Americans know it's pretty ridiculous to excoriate Democrats for not immediately--after only a couple of months holding Congress by a razor thin margin--fixing a problem they didn't create.

Is "loss and the deaths of millions" a huige political albatross right now? You betcha. But Jim, tis thy albatross. Learn to embrace it, for it shall not go away no matter how much spinning and parsing ye do.


Glanton (none / 0) (#13)
by jimakaPPJ on Sat Feb 24, 2007 at 07:27:09 PM EST

You are ignoring history.

Have fun eating humble pie in a few years.


: Has nothing to do (none / 0) (#15)
by glanton on Sat Feb 24, 2007 at 10:29:34 PM EST

with humble pie, being proven right, or any of that. Just an observation that everyone on all sides of this know that the Iraq thing is a Republican thing.
But your comment is revealing. Instead of discussion you seem to be growing more and more fond of what we used to call "Pi$$ing Contests."

Grasping At Straws (none / 0) (#12)
by john horse on Sat Feb 24, 2007 at 12:50:14 PM EST

Which polling organization do you have more faith in - Gallop, AP, CBS News, and the Pew Research Center or the Independent Business Daily? One group has been conducting polls for years and has a reputation for reliability and accuracy. The other that PPJ links to gives advice on investing in stocks.

By the way, when you add the numbers in the December 06 response to PPJ's poll to the question "How Important Is A US Victory?" you get 101%. Even rank amateurs know that poll results should never total more than 100%. I hope these folks are better figuring out stocks than they are politics.
