Redstate

(Life in the shadow of the dreaded Kennedy Resolution. Cue the sound effects.)

By Mark Kilmer Posted in Special Features — Comments (0) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

Sunday, January 14, 2007

The Vice President told Chris Wallace on FNS that backing out of Iraq would destroy the confidence placed in the United States by such allies in the war on terror as Hamid Karzai and Pervez Musharraf, and would undo the work we've done so far in that conflict.

On MTP and TW, Steve Hadley defended the President's plan for Iraq from the hosts' bromides. On MTP, Chris Dodd brought back nostalgia for the 1980's when he referred to the war in Iraq as a Rubik's Cube. Chuck Hagel, on MTP, continued his niche Presidential campaign/standup routine, after Cheney had earlier dismissed his blather as blind criticism, not analysis.

Okinawa Jack Murtha told host George Stephanopoulos on TW that Congress had to micromanage the Department of Defense, and he added that he personally will hold hearings to shut down the terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo Bay.

On FTN, John McCain sounded his themes on Iraq but refused to criticize Babs Boxer for suggesting that Condi Rice is an ineffective Secretary of State because she does not have children. Later on the same show, Barack Obama called for a "surge in diplomacy" and promised that he would announce his Presidential intentions "fairly soon."

On LE, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshywar Zebari declared that this latest strategy was not Iraq's final chance to succeed, and he called for the freeing of the Erbil Five. He noted that Iraq had to live with Iran and Syria as neighbors and wanted to foster more friendly relations.

Next on LE, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman kept boasting Teddy Kennedy's sense of the senate resolution opposing the President's attempt to secure Baghdad and win the Iraq war. He said that it would be a "powerful statement." He predicted 51 votes, including 45 Democrats.

Read More for the show-by-show review...

THE VEEP ON FNS. Host Chris Wallace of FOX News Sunday talked to the Vice President of the United States, Dick Cheney. On screen, Wallace quoted the President from Wednesday's speech, that our soldiers "are engaged in a struggle that will determine the direction of the global war on terror, and our safety here at home." Why then, Wallace asked, aren't we sending even more troops to Iraq, and why are we putting so much faith in the untrustworthy Iraqis? "Why not say that this is a U.S. war and we will do whatever it takes to win?" The Veep answered, "In effect, we have said that." We're sending the right amount of troops, according to our military, and "it can't be just a U.S. show," as the Iraqis ultimately have to take over. They need help, Cheney said, and we can provide that help "for the foreseeable future." He believes that we will ultimately do what it takes to win.

Cheney said that people like Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan and Pervez Musharraf in Pak have to have confidence in the United States if they are to keep putting their lives on the line in the war on terror, and leaving Iraq would destroy that confidence. We'd lose all that we've done so far, and Osama bin Laden would have won. OBL believes, Cheney said, that he can make us leave Iraq because we "don't have the stomach for a long war.'

Wallace played old clips of the President saying that we were winning Iraq and asked why we should believe "that this time, he's got it right." Cheney answered that we've made enormous progress in Iraq, but we've still a lot remaining to do.

"No war ever goes smoothly all the way; you often have to make adjustments, and that's what we're doing here."

Wallace played an old clip of General Abizaid from last November saying that we should not send more troops. "Why are you overruling the commanders?" We're not overruling the commanders, Cheney answered, adding that Abizaid supported the President's plan.

Cheney spoke of a debate regarding the emphasis put on transitioning to Iraq control versus U.S. forces handling the security situation. A balance to be struck. In the old balance, he said, the emphasis has been on the transition to the Iraqis, The decision has been taken, he said, that the U.S. had to help get security in Baghdad before these other things would be possible.

Cheney said that the emphasis now is on "going after the security problem in Baghdad. That has to come first."

Wallace asked how direct we'd been with Maliki that he can't keep disappointing us. Cheney said that we've been very direct with Maliki and his government that they have to "step up and take responsibility." Cheney pointed out the "new rules of engagement," with no outside interference. This is just as much Maliki's program, Cheney said, as it is ours.

Wallace asked if this were an open-ended commitment, and Cheney would answer only that "we're focused on making this plan work." He refused to "go beyond that," in his words.

Wallace asked if Congress has any control over the conduct of the war. Cheney said that Congress has an important role in funding the war. He mentioned the advisory group comprised of the chairmen and ranking members of the "key committees of the House and Senate." (Lieberman's idea, so I'll call it the Joe Lieberman Complaint Club.) Wallace pointed out that this panel couldn't stop the war, and Cheney said that the President is Constitutionally the Commander in Chief and you can't run a war by committee. Wallace asked about Teddy Kennedy's resolution, and Cheney said it would be a Sense of the Congress resolution, and while they're interested in what Congress had to say, it would not affect the conduct of the war.

Cheney thinks that those who would try to block the troops would be "undercutting" (Wallace's word) our troops. The new element, he said, was that the Dems had taken over the Congress, and he has "yet to hear a coherent policy out of the Democrats." They have "nothing to offer."

Cheney called this "an existential conflict. It's the kind of conflict that's going to drive our policy and our government for the next 20 or 30 or 40 years. We have to prevail, and we have to have the stomach for the fight long term."

He said Chuck Hagel's statements – that everything was a disastrous blunder – was "not analysis" but "just criticism." Buying into Hagel's attitude would be "absolutely the wrong thing to do," he said.

Wallace showed exit polls that showed 2/3rds of those Americans stopped after voting thought Iraq was very important and most thought we should get out. Cheney said that polls change "week-by-week." He criticized "sticking our finger in the wind," and he repeated that it buys into our enemy's belief that we just don't have the stomach for this.

After a break, they spoke of Iran. Wallace wanted a pledge, before Bush/Cheney left office, that they'd take care of the problem with Iran. Cheney said that they're working on it.

Wallace asked Cheney why he and his wife had invited Scooter Libby to his Christmas Party.

Wallace: "Why?"

Cheney: "Why what?"

Wallace: "Why invite him to your party?"

Cheney: "He's a friend. He's a good man. He's one of the finest individuals I've ever known."

Wallace asked if Libby were "honest." He's "one of the most honest men" Cheney says he's ever know.

Cheney said that he has "strong views" about the continued prosecution of Libby despite the fact that he was not the one who leaked Joe Wilson's wife's name, but he's "not going to talk about it." Lynn Cheney did talk about it on FNS on Christmas Eve, calling it "bizarre" and it "does not reflect well on our judicial system." Cheney smiled his smile and refused comment: "I'm not going to talk about it." Nothing he's said or heard has shaken his confidence in Libby's integrity.

HADLEY AND RUSSERT ON MTP AND TW. National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley was the first guest on both ABC's This Week and NBC's Meet the Press. Host Tim Russert on MTP played an old clip of the President arguing that sending more troops to Iraq would "send the wrong message" to the Iraqis, that they could lay back while we take care of things. Why the change? Hadley responded that this was a "New Baghdad Strategy." Things had changed since the President said the things in the clip Russert dredged from the vault, and he mentioned the "unity government" as an example. He said that the Iraqis need our help to succeed. The only other options, he said, were to "say the course," which he said "everyone agrees" is not working, or to withdraw and leave chaos.

On TW, host George Stephanopoulos declared that the President had said in his speech that he was going to invade Iran. He asked if Iran and Syria were at war with the United States? Hadley said that Iran was guilty of "unacceptable activity in Iraq." Steph kept pounding away about an invasion of Iran, but Hadley told him repeatedly that we are talking about Iraq: "That's what we're dealing with here." Steph said that someone had told Joe Biden that the President wasn't allowed to invade Iran.

Steph asked if Congress could withhold funds for the additional troops. Hadley said that the money for the deployment was already in place. The White House hopes to use the "hearings process" to convince Congress to get with the program.

Over on MTP, Russert asked Hadley what if punk cleric Moqtada al Sadr withdraws his support of the Maliki government. Hadley answered that Maliki was working with a moderate alliance, his support base was there, and he could govern without Sadr's support.

Russert declared that the President was "wrong about" every single thing, and he went over the old list of "being greeted as liberators," as well as WMD. Why, he wanted to know, should the American people trust him about the effectiveness of a troop surge? Hadley explained that the "consequences of failure were too high." Whatever mistakes have been made in Iraq, the President's plan is the only way forward.

Russert said that the New York Times had reported that the President was making war decisions based on the politics of the moment while our men and women are dying. Hadley responded that the President made his decisions based on the circumstances on the ground. He did not reverse the argument, pointing out that the Congressional Democratic leadership was acting clearly and purely on politics. He wasn't going to play gotcha, I guess.

Russert accused the President of "buying time," delaying an outcome in Iraq until he could "pass it off" to the next President. Hadley denied this. Russert said that the President "raised eyebrows" when he mentioned Iran. (It raised Olbermann's eyebrows, but Olbermann has no intellectual control over such things.) Russert asked if the President were going to invade Iran. Hadley denied this.

JACK MURTHA ON TW. Soundly defeated candidate for House Majority Leader, Okinawa Jack Murtha, told host Stephanopoulos, on ABC's This Week, a thing or two about what Congress must do: "We have to… micromanage the Defense Department." Welcome to Murtha's attempted Vietnam redux. (Murtha muttered that Congress had to micromanage the D.O.D. because the President doesn't "listen to the people." I don't know if he meant the American people or Murtha's experts.)

Murtha, who still advocates surrender, told Steph: "There's no question about my support for the military." There is, though. Murtha said that our troops were not up to bearing what he called "the most intense combat since Iwo Jima." (It was pretty rough on Okinawa, too, Jack, but that, ironically, was part of a victorious end game.)

Murtha told Steph that we should have no permanent military base and "no torture" in Iraq. He will hold hearings, he said, at which they will close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay.

DODD, LIEBERMAN, HAGEL, AND KYL ON MTP. After Steve Hadley, Russert trucked out four U.S. Senators: Chris Dodd, Joe Lieberman, Chuck Hagel, and Jon Kyl, at least two of whom are running for President.

Dodd said Maliki has missed goals, so sending 17,000 troops to Baghdad won't help him. He wants to pull all of our troops out of "major urban areas."

Lieberman disagreed, point out that "we're working in the larger context of the war on terror." He said that the President's plan ("This plan") offers the "prospect of security." We need security, he said, if we're to have political or economic solutions. All other plans he's heard offered, Lieberman said, lead to failure. He asked his Democrat colleagues to give the "brilliant" General Dave Petraeus a chance to work his magic. Russert asked him if the President would abide by the Ted Kennedy resolution in opposition to the President's plan. Lieberman said that he hopes not.

Chuck Hagel intoned: "No one in Congress wants the collapse of Iraq." (The body of a bull converts digested food ultimately into what substance?) He said that "escalation" – which is the Democrats' term for the President's additional troops – is not "the responsible action to take." He declared that the Middle East is more dangerous now than at any time since World War II, thus we should withdraw our soldiers now (and let it explode). He said that the American people do not support the President. He said that our allies do not support the President. Chuck Hagel would not rule out supporting Teddy Kennedy's resolution. "This is a war of attrition," said Chuck Hagel, conjuring up in my mind images of trench warfare in Ypres, 1915.

Russert asked Senator Kyl why he supported the President. Kyle said that all other strategies lead to failure.

Dodd posited that the war in Iraq was a "Rubik's Cube," which made me briefly nostalgic about 1982.

JOHN MCCAIN FTN. Host Bob Schieffer first talked to Senator John McCain about the President's plan, which he said faced "withering skepticism." (What has skepticism ever withered? Come on, Bob.) He began with McCain. He told McCain that the public was "overwhelmingly opposed" to the plan and Congress didn't support it. He played a clip from the President's interview on CBS' 60 Minutes in which the President said that he had the authority to carry out his plan regardless. Schieffer wanted to know if the President could do this. McCain said that "this was a chance" to "have a chance to succeed." He thinks it can succeed. Schieffer pointed out that the Dems (John Edwards was first) called it the "McCain Doctrine." McCain talked about "McCain principles."

Schieffer asked about Ted Kennedy's "resolution of disapproval" and asked if the GOP would filibuster. McCain said that he would vote against the resolution but it would be "foolish to filibuster." McCain talked about the message that Kennedy wanted to send to our troops. He said that if the Dems are serious about this, they should debate cutting funds for the troops, not play politics.

Schieffer asked why General Petraeus wasn't already in Baghdad. McCain said they should get him there, as well as the troops. McCain suggested that some of the reluctance from the Pentagon was from people who thought the "old strategy" could still work.

The option if we leave, McCain said, was "catastrophe." Bloodletting will increase, he said, and we'd end up back there anyway until more difficult circumstances.

Schieffer asked if McCain thought "this was it, this works or we're in a totally different situation." McCain said it has to work, but he has confidence that our military can do it.

Schieffer played a clip of Babs Boxer arguing that Condi Rice was not qualified to talk about troops because she had no children and couldn't understand the sacrifice. McCain said we should "have a respect" for each others' views. He believes "a full debate will disclose the consequences of failure."

Schieffer asked if the President were "opening a third front" by going after the Iranians in Iraq. McCain said that we have to go after the "Iranians in Iraq doing bad things."

BARAK OBAMA ON FTN. Host Schieffer next spoke to Barack Obama, by satellite from Chicago. Schieffer asked Obama about cutting off funding. Obama answered that McCain has been "consistent." Obama does not believe that we have a "future catastrophe" to which to look forward if we leave now, as we're in that catastrophe now. He took credit for the Iraq Study Group's proposal for a "phased withdrawal." (Taking credit for the work of others is a good sign of Presidential aspirations.) Schieffer stuck to his initial question: Would you cut off funds? Obama said that Kennedy's resolution would "send a message." Then he would look at "what options we have to constrain the President." He wants to support the troops we have there now.

Barack talked of "putting pressure on the Iraqis" to do what they had to do.

Obama has said that the Vice President "has pursued this wrongheaded course." He said that it is a bad situation because "almost everybody agrees it is a bad situation." He wants a phased withdrawal, and he wants to demand a political solution between the Shi'as and the Sunnis.

Obama believes that a "well structured, phased redeployment in concert with a surge in diplomacy," there are no more risks to that approach than to the President's approach, we he called: "Stay the Course, Plus." He called his plan, "bipartisan," and said that everyone supported it.

Schieffer said that Kennedy was also going to introduce legislation to cut off funding for troops being sent to Iraq. Obama favored only the meaningless resolution, not the legislation.

Obama will announce his Presidential intentions "fairly soon." He wouldn't say days or weeks.

THE IRAQI FOREIGN MINISTER ON LE. Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari was host Wolf Blitzer's first guest on CNN's Late Edition. "Will the Iraqis do their part?"

Zebari told Blitzer: "Yes, indeed, the Iraqi government supports President Bush's new strategy." It is consistent with the Iraqi government's own strategy, he said. He said that this was not a political game, all have a common goal. Zebari disagrees with those talking heads who say that this new strategy is a "last chance."

Wolf pointed out that the New York Times doesn't think the Iraqis will show up for the fight. Zebari said that this security campaign will be led by the Iraqis, supported by the coalition. The Iraqi government will commit the needed troops.

Wolf asked if the Iraqi government would put restraints on the U.S. military governing what it could do to stop the militias. Zebari said that they had to stop the militias.

Blitzer asked if al Sadr were part of the solution or the problem. Zebari answered that they tried to make him part of the solution, and he might come back to the government, but the bottom line is that there will be no militias.

Blitzer asked Zebari if he supported the President's plan to stop the Iranians and the Syrians. Zebari expressed support but noted that Iraq has to live with Iran and Syria and Iraq has to "cultivate good relations" with their neighbors. He asked for "tangible evidence" of the good will of those two countries, specifying stopping the flow of insurgents and arms into Iraq.

Blitzer asked about the recently captured Iranians, who had ties to the insurgency. Zebari said that these five Iranians had worked in Iraq for many years and he said he is "seeking their release if they are found Not Guilty." He said that the Kurdish Regional Authority had approved of that Iranian office from which the Iranians were arrested.

LEVIN ON LATE EDITION. After a commercial for something called Phillips Stool Softener, Blitzer interviewed the ever-constipated Carl Levin, dour as ever. He's chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Levin repeated the lefty meme that the Iraqi government does not keep its promises so he has no faith in them. This has strains similar to what we heard in Russert's question of Steven Hadley, in which the Meet the Press host suggested that the President had lied about everything to this point, so the American people had no reason to believe him now.

Levin said that the Iraqis want us to provide security and solve their political solution. We have to force a solution, he said, not keep an "open-ended commitment."

Levin called for a bi-partisan resolution with 51 members saying that we do not support sending more troops in Iraq. Johnson can't vote by proxy and he's not conscious, so 51 is a tough number. They lose Lieberman. But Levin's counting on Republicans. If he gets Hagel, the case can be made to expel the man from the conference. (Not that it would happen, but suggesting it would be a "powerful statement. See below.) Levein could have counted on Linc Chafee, of course, but that nightmare, my friends, is over.

Blitzer played a clip of the President's speech in which he warned that we'd have mass killings, etc., a terrible situation if we left Iraq. Levin said that we already had that because of the President's policy. He then let slip that he expected only 45 Democrats "and some Republicans" to vote for Teddy Kennedy's resolution.

Blitzer played a clip of Russ Feingold demanding the Congress use the "power of the purse" to get our troops out of Iraq. Levin said he does not support that, but he does support reducing our presence in Iraq on a timetable. He was very big on the Kennedy resolution. He said that it will be a "powerful statement."

Blitzer quoted the Wall Street Journal editorially predicted that Levin will only talk, won't follow up on his threats. Levin said that he could predict in advance what the WSJ would say, and the again stressed that Kennedy resolution.
----------------------------------

This one was fun. Have at it.