This would almost be funny.
If it was happening to some other Congress, that is. One in a book.
By Moe Lane Posted in Congress — Comments (9) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Although the cutting off at the knees here was pretty impressive:
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., said Democrats would be "relentless."
"There will be resolution after resolution, amendment after amendment . . . just like in the days of Vietnam," Schumer said. "The pressure will mount, the president will find he has no strategy, he will have to change his strategy and the vast majority of our troops will be taken out of harm's way and come home."
Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said: "We're going to move on to other things."
(Via Decision '08)
'Course, don't know if it was Reid or the Kansas City Star doing the cutting. You have to be careful of the Dread Ellipsis; alas, I haven't found transcripts for either set of commentary yet.
Read on.
So - assuming that the context of the above quotes doesn't change either's meaning - what's going on?
Pandering, o my droogies: pandering. You see, Senator Reid can count. More accurately, he can count up to 51... except that when it comes to Iraq, he actually can't. He tops out at 50, thanks to Senator Joe Lieberman and his willingness to break ranks over the issue. Now couple this with the cloture rules, which effectively require that any criticism of our Middle Eastern policy needs to have ten Republican Senators sign off on it. Worse - from the Democrats' point of view - the Republican Senators know this; and they thus know that the GOP will win a straight-up vote in the Senate on this issue unless one of them breaks ranks.
Now, Reid's best strategy on this would be to simply find something suitably tepid enough to get the Senators he needs and move on. The problem? Well it's that - surprise, surprise! - the people that got him into this mess (our friends in the progressive Left, of course*) aren't going to let him get away with that without a whine. They want action! They want a fight! They want to be taken seriously!
So out goes Sen Schumer to promise them jam tomorrow and remind them of jam yesterday, while Reid gets back to the infinitely more important task of trying to find a way to finagle the new lobbying rules into something more conducive to a positive cash flow. I almost can't blame him. 'Almost' because he and his wanted these people around in the first place, if only for the votes and money. It seems vaguely churlish to keep kicking them to the curb like this.
And, yes, this is a kick. Rep Murtha can embarrass himself and the Washington Post all he likes - or, for that matter, the New York Times. But if the Democratic Party was as prepared to follow the antiwar movement's lead as it pretends to be, then they'd have started defunding the war already. This? This is... this is fetishism. Roleplay. It's something to take up time until the primaries roll around, whereupon all that useful energy (and much more important money) will pretty much automatically shunt over to whoever the new Democratic candidate is. They just have to get through the next few months.
As I said, this would almost be funny. If I was reading about it in a novel.
Moe
*No, really. The progressives shot (metaphorically, not literally) at a sitting Senator, and missed; and the Senate Democrats are now paying the price of failure. Gotta love politics, no?
« Rep. Capuano's Newspeak for Censorship — Comments (5) | Wars and Words — Comments (3) »
This would almost be funny. 9 Comments (0 topical, 9 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Is an amendment that would say that Congress will not cut off funding for the troops in Iraq. According to Lindsey Graham, that amendment would get up to 75 votes; either way, a clear bi-partisan supermajority from Senators who don't want to be on record as putting troops in harm's way. Dodd, Biden, Clinton, and Obama are especially fighting against such a vote, because it puts them in a position where they have to run left to appease their rabid base, but they have to run right to not appear in the fringe minority with the general population.
The truth of the matter is, even with 49 votes (50 with Lieberman) and the minority, we hold the trump card. Forcing a vote on that issue will splinter the Democrats, like the Alito filibuster did. And, as I'm sure has already happened, McConnell has gone to Reid and said, "You want a vote on your resolution? Then allow a vote on ours." And Reid knows who would win that battle. So now Reid is in a particularly tough position of not appearing as if he's not trying to get a vote, but all the while doing everything he can to not get a vote. If he makes that compromise, he loses. If he doesn't get a vote on the surge, he loses.
But here's the really damning part. While half of the Democrats are dedicated to ending the war, the other half (and in truth, both halves) are dedicated to embarassing the President. That's the half that Reid is on. He's the new Majority Leader, and he wants to take it out for a spin and do doughnuts on the White House lawn. That's why there's no serious push to defund the war; because half of the Democratic Caucus isn't ready for real action. When it comes to a non-binding resolution to flip the bird at the White House, a political gesture only, they love it. When it comes to actual action that has actual consequences, they're not so eager.
Suddenly, all of those people that say the Democrats don't have a plan don't seem to goofy.
That's why there's no serious push to defund the war; because half of the Democratic Caucus isn't ready for real action. When it comes to a non-binding resolution to flip the bird at the White House, a political gesture only, they love it. When it comes to actual action that has actual consequences, they're not so eager.
I wouldn't necessarily count on that. The nonbinding resolutions were just there to test the waters and rally the troops and get them fired up. The Donks were just sighting in their guns, so to speak. Give MoveCongress.org a few more weeks to work. *Seven* Republicans have broken ranks already, just on the nonbinding resolution, and my guess is that you're going to see another three (or more) walk across the aisle in the coming month or so. The Republicans in the Senate are weak, and they're scared. I have no faith in the Republican Senatorial caucus. They're going to get tortured by the drip...drip...drip... of the media, the polling numbers, and the endless barrage of resolutions.
I'll make an open bet right now for anyone who is willing to take it: The Congress is going to enact war-stopping, meddling micromanaging resolutions with real teeth within the next 60 days. Our spineless caucus, with these people leading the charge to the exits, is going to fold. That's my bet. I hope I lose. This is the kind of thing where I love people on RedState to be able to tell me that I was all wet.
Watch Hillary's Hillcast and then, if you'd like, contact the websites of our Republican traitors and give them a piece of your mind:
Coleman (Minnesota) -- (202) 224-5641
Collins (Maine) -- (202) 224-2523
Hagel (Nebraska) --(202) 224-4224
Smith (Oregon) -- (202) 224-3753
Snowe (Maine) -- (202) 224-5344
Specter (Pennsylvania) -- (202) 224-4254
Warner (Virginia) -- (202) 224-2023
Not voting on the nonbinding resolution yesterday were:
McCain (AZ), Kyl (AZ), Murkowski (AK), Cochran (MS), Bond (MO), Ensign (NV), Corker (TN), Bennett (UT), Hatch (UT). Also, Johnson (D-SD) did not vote.
Let's say the seven losers remain losers. The list above seems to be the roster which the nutroots will be targeting. They are the "firewall" to put it loosely.
And here cometh Hillary:
"Now it's time to say the redeployment should start in 90 days or the Congress will revoke authorization for this war," the New York senator said in a video on her campaign Web site, repeating a point included in a bill she introduced on Friday.
I think we should do it now and save the veto if necessary for later. I think we should absolutely get as many members of the caucus on board and on-record immediately, before the "drip...drip" begins and George Soros has a chance to hack away. Because much of this is being driven, once again, by Soros. I hate that SOB.
but the chances are very questionable given the names of those Senators on the list of Republicans "not voting."
Should, by chance, a vote on binding legislation actually reach the 60 vote threshold in the US Senate by moving four more Republicans, the votes of seven additional Republicans, or six plus Sen. Lieberman, would still be required in order to override a presidential veto and enact said legislation.
As bad as the current political climate surrounding Iraq has become, I just don't see that many Republican Senators willfully committing political suicide-- at least not simultaneously.
***
“The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.” – Ronald Reagan
I tend to argue from the "worst case scenario" backward. Hagel's comments this morning don't do anything to make me think that's a such a big mistake. ;)
looking forward to '08 and his re-election to the U.S. Senate, by focusing on what he perceives will be the "mood" of the electorate in the general election.
Looking beyond the Nebraska GOP's primary, Sen. Hagel will be committing a fatal political-mistake.
***
“The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.” – Ronald Reagan
I would venture that at least seven are "safe". On the other two, I just don't know much about Murkowski or Bond.
And I doubt Johnson will be voting any time soon.
____
Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled, or hanged. — J. Michael Waller
Those old saturday night live sketches with billy crystal where they would detail out every kind of pain imaginable.
I can only hope you are right about this being theatre for what they consider the lumpen proletariat.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777