Surprise: Webb’s troop-rotation amendment fails, 56-41; Update: Seven Republicans switch
posted at 1:15 pm on July 11, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
With thanks to Noam Askew for the heads up, this was the first quasi-withdrawal proposal on the agenda and thus a possible bellwether. It was a motion for cloture so 60 votes were needed (as we all know by now); the roll’s not up yet, but given that Lieberman always sides with the hawks on Iraq legislation it means there are at least seven Republican defections. One of them is probably Olympia Snowe, who said today she’ll join Gordon Smith as the second Republican to back the Reed-Levin cut-and-jog plan. That would require withdrawal to start within 120 days and end by April, which as NZ Bear notes in commenting on Ike Skelton’s similar proposal, means the drawdown would begin less than five months after full implementation of the surge.
Meanwhile, fun on the Senate floor:
“I’ve seen this movie before from the liberal left in America, who share no responsibility for what happened in Cambodia when we said no,” said McCain, whose campaign has lost support partly because of his advocacy of the war. He singled out Mike Gravel, a Vietnam War-era senator from Alaska who strongly opposed that mission and is waging a long-shot antiwar candidacy for the 2008 Democratic nomination.
Biden jumped in. “Give me a break! Quoting Gravel as the voice of the left?” he exclaimed. “This is a man who, God love him, nominated himself for vice president. I mean, come on!”
Vice President Cheney attended a closed-door Republican luncheon to appeal for party unity in what Sen. Susan Collins (Maine) called “a vigorous debate.” Sen. Ted Stevens (Alaska) said he took Cheney’s side, telling his colleagues: “If we leave prematurely, it would be absolute anarchy. We’d be turning over to al-Qaeda one of the largest oil-producing states in the world.”
Well, no, actually, we’d be turning it over to Iran: most of the oil is in eastern and southern Iraq, not in AQ’s Sunni stomping grounds.
I’ll have the roll and a few updates here soon. It’s worth reading that WaPo piece while you wait as it shows how similar the Democratic proposals are to the ones being backed by moderate Republicans like Susan Collins. They’re all variations of Baker-Hamilton; the difference is that the Dems actually want to cap the number of troops and set dates for withdrawal whereas Collins wants simply to redefine the mission until it’s so limited as to make tens of thousands of troops superfluous and force a withdrawal that way. Reminds me of the “yes on cloture, no on the actual bill” two-step we saw during the shamnesty fight. She’s looking to accomplish the same thing as her ostensible opponents, she just doesn’t have the stones to be as forthright as they are about what she’s doing.
Stand by.
Update: Bush says he’ll veto anything with a timetable. Does that mean Collins’s amendment would be okay? He might be willing to settle for that since it leaves him with the weasel option of maintaining troop levels but reassigning them within the parameters of the newly defined mission. That would risk angering Congress to the point where they might be willing to cut off funds, but I wouldn’t put it past him.
Update: Still waiting for the roll. Have a look at the results of the Gallup poll on declining support for the war. It’s an imperfect comparison but more Americans now say it was wrong to send troops to Iraq than said it was wrong to send troops to Vietnam 35 years ago. Seventy percent support the Reed-Levin proposal to have most troops out by April. The GOP is doing a noble thing here by backing Petraeus but we really might reap the whirlwind next November, especially if there’s some sort of mega-attack between now and September. The military’s expecting it, in fact. Still, a majority — including a majority of independents — would give Petraeus until September.
Update: Something else to read — “Go Deep or Get Out,” by Stephen Biddle, which argues that Baker-Hamilton is the worst possible plan for U.S. troops since it exposes them to added danger without doing anything to help secure the country. Either commit to a substantial troop presence or withdraw, he says. Given the poll results, that means the latter.
Update: Here are the seven switchers, all of them now in favor of a de facto slow bleed. It was a party line vote otherwise.
Seven Republicans voted with the Democrats, all of whom have criticized Bush’s war policy to varying degrees in recent weeks. They include Hagel, Snowe, and Sens. Norm Coleman (Minn.), Susan Collins (Maine), Gordon Smith (Ore.), John Sununu (N.H.) and John Warner (Va.). With the exception of Snowe, all the Republicans who voted aye are up for re-election in 2008.
Killer polls helped kill shamnesty and now they may kill the surge. Meanwhile, to no one’s great surprise, Hagel says he’s joining Snowe and Smith in backing Reed-Levin.
Update: Senate Republicans aren’t the only ones inching away from the surge. Gulp.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
We have very very few actual conservatives left anywhere in congress…sigh!
sabbott on July 11, 2007 at 1:18 PM
I listened to Ted Kennedy’s speech afterwards in which he praised the terrorists success and what can only be said to be their invincibilty since all he talked about is the number of Americans and civillians have been ikilled and nary a word about any enemy killed. They must be dancing in the streets of Al Quedadom with such support. I am sure they will use the speech to bolster their followers. Hell Zawahiri doesn’t talk about their successes in such glowing terms.
/spit
LakeRuins on July 11, 2007 at 1:18 PM
Webb’s amendment was simply too clever by half. It would have forced the President to withdraw troops by legally mandating the amount of time the troops were to be at home between deployments.
Bad public policy for several different reasons. My guess is that the “rats” are putting all their appease and surrender eggs in the Levin-Reed basket.
highhopes on July 11, 2007 at 1:24 PM
Senators’ Warner, Snowe, Collins and Coleman voted with the Democrats
BadgerHawk on July 11, 2007 at 1:24 PM
When even Michael Ware gets it…
tree hugging sister on July 11, 2007 at 1:25 PM
He is absolutely correct. To advocate withdrawal is to advocate genocide. It makes me sick that some republicans are supporting the advocates of genocide.
RushBaby on July 11, 2007 at 1:26 PM
Sununu, Hagel and Smith
BadgerHawk on July 11, 2007 at 1:26 PM
Now Sen Casey (D-PA) reading a list of dead from PA. PA has problems and it ain’t because the steel industry is hurting.
LakeRuins on July 11, 2007 at 1:28 PM
A little bit of both I think. Oil is all over Dyala and significant finds have been made recently in Anbar. I also would expect al Qaeda, a newly emboldened al Qaeda, to strike into very oil rich Kurdistan. Bottom line is that there will be a hellacious fight between al Qaeda, Iran, Iraqi loyalists and potentially other neighboring countries who don’t want a failed state or an Iranian dominated state as their neighbor.
This also presupposes Israel will sit on their hands and do nothing while the region descends into chaos. I don’t see that happening.
JackStraw on July 11, 2007 at 1:42 PM
Hmmmm… who missed the vote?
McCain?
Romeo13 on July 11, 2007 at 1:47 PM
Vitter was one. Go figure.
JackStraw on July 11, 2007 at 1:50 PM
Note that he WaP article repeats the new meme “McCain, whose campaign has lost support partly because of his advocacy of the war.” That must explain why all the other antiwar Republicans are doing so well compared to McCain.
Mig on July 11, 2007 at 1:55 PM
I don’t like having my name right below his picture like that. Creepy.
-Hope
tikvah on July 11, 2007 at 1:56 PM
Watching the coverage on CSPAN of the senate and since the defeat of this amendment there have been 4 Democrat senators, Kennedy, Casey, Klobaucher, and now Feinstein and one Independent, Lieberman, who have taken to the floor and given speeches. Aren’t there any Republican senators?
LakeRuins on July 11, 2007 at 1:58 PM
What would happen with the polls if we started to win and it was so reported?
bnelson44 on July 11, 2007 at 1:58 PM
My guess is that they are in meetings right now
bnelson44 on July 11, 2007 at 1:59 PM
Am I imagining things, or did Biden just admit that such a thing as “the left” exists?
Usually, he only acknowledges the existence of “Patriotic Progressives” and “Right-Wing Fanatics”.
cheers
eon
eon on July 11, 2007 at 2:03 PM
You know, I can’t recall who said it, but the only real conservative voice America has today is on talk radio. We’ve got guys like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and mark Levin saying what our elected officials should be saying. Maybe this is why blathermouths like Trent Lott and Diane Feinstein want to shut talk radio down. You think about it, talk radio is the only real thorn in the side these ass clowns have right now.
pilamaye on July 11, 2007 at 2:09 PM
So, yesterday you linked to an MSNBC article with one anonymous administration source to bolster your argument on what, I can’t even remember anymore. Now you link to a Gallup poll taken over the weekend of a little over 1,000 adults, not even voting adults to show further waning support for the war?
I guess that whole Immigration debate really got the best of you, so much that you are linking to items you would have scoffed at before in order to show Bush’s popularity eroding even more, to bolster your side - or so it appears.
I happen to agree with you on most of the immigration issue, just not your tactics used in supporting your position. It will be interesting to hear what you have to say when the Democrats control the White House and both Houses. If you don’t back off some on the rhetoric you will be parcially responsible for that outcome.
Whippet on July 11, 2007 at 2:09 PM
There is a lot of spin in that article.
bnelson44 on July 11, 2007 at 2:23 PM
It appears to me the senate is playing games based on polling just prior to their summer break. The situation in Iraq could turn out to be a huge positive upon the senate’s return in September.
swami on July 11, 2007 at 2:23 PM
Senate Republicans aren’t the only ones inching away from the surge.
Gulp.SpewMuch better.
Term limits would end this tripe (sorry for offending tripe). Politico’s care about being elected i.e. poll watching.
On-my-soap-box on July 11, 2007 at 2:36 PM
even Republicans voted with the Democrats, all of whom have criticized Bush’s war policy to varying degrees in recent weeks. They include Hagel, Snowe, and Sens. Norm Coleman (Minn.), Susan Collins (Maine), Gordon Smith (Ore.), John Sununu (N.H.) and John Warner (Va.). With the exception of Snowe, all the Republicans who voted aye are up for re-election in 2008.
rplat on July 11, 2007 at 2:48 PM
rplat
Yeah, what he said!
On-my-soap-box on July 11, 2007 at 2:50 PM
Hardly a surprise but the President has not provided leadership to the country on this one! We he has come out he has tried to sell the same old tired slogans that aren’t working any more. I’m a conservative and support the troops but am very very tired of this enterprise and don’t think it is really keeping us safe! I know…Iran that GIANT evil empire will destroy the world if we withdraw…give me a fricking break! They are a punk country run by a punk…they know it…we know it…they know we know it!
sabbott on July 11, 2007 at 2:53 PM
There is a poll bias out there,
Americans want to lose this war.
May I ask a different question?
How will withdrawing from Iraq, and allowing genocide, benifit the USA?
opps not a yes or no question.
Howwill withdrawing from Iraq,and allowing genocide,benifit the USA?dingoatemebaby on July 11, 2007 at 2:55 PM
They aren’t saying that they might withdraw the troops. They’re merely saying that if one thing doesn’t work, they’ll try another.
AlexB on July 11, 2007 at 2:55 PM
The Republicans are freekin idiots!!!!!
If the Dums so believe that our surrender of the field in Iraq will not result in a mind boggling consequences for both the US and our GWOT effort then let them force the issue by themselves. Force them to pull the funds, Force them to by themselves assist the Radicals in defeating the US military in the field, Force them to hold the consequences. To co-opt their effort for what will result in NO Repub gain or benefit yet will however give the Dums cover when the consequences come rolling in via waves of blood from our ME/allies and here at home.
The idea that flipping now will change anything short ensuring the repubs defeat is idiotic.
If we surrender in Iraq a war that by any historical comparison is a unbelievable success so far then we will have proven to the world we are a DEAD nation just waiting to be plucked. I for one will never allow myself my family or any of my future generations to fight for this nation unless it will entail first/foremost the mass deportation or imprisonment of the Seditionist elements that have led to the desease induced death of this once great nation. If the US cannot stomach the historically minimal loses that this Iraq phase has so far demanded then the LLL’s have succeeded in making the US incapable of waging war. A nation that cannot wage war will not long be a sovereign nation, just ask Tibet the only other pacifist nation to ever exist.
PITIFUL WILL BE OUR NAME
C-Low on July 11, 2007 at 3:06 PM
We need a surge of true patriots in the Senate and House about now…
congsan on July 11, 2007 at 3:10 PM
Votes up
bnelson44 on July 11, 2007 at 3:21 PM
If the Dums so believe that our surrender of the field in Iraq will not result in a mind boggling consequences”
Mind boggling consequences?
That sounds a lot like Al Gore warning about Global Warming.
MB4 on July 11, 2007 at 3:41 PM
Snowe is a pro-abortion Republicrat.
She hails from a State that became a socialist experiment and supports lifetime, lackluster politicians.
Hening on July 11, 2007 at 3:43 PM
Hrm, I’d love for Thompson to respond to that LAT times article. They claim that he “makes it clear” that he isn’t “signed on” to keeping 160,000 troops in Iraq. Yet the only quote from him is that withdrawing would be disastrous and that decisions need to be made on a “day by day” basis.
I wonder how much of that article is spin. Cuz everything Fred! has said to date basically says Petraeus knows what he’s doing, and he supports the general’s plan. I can’t imagine that’s suddenly changed.
apollyonbob on July 11, 2007 at 4:00 PM
Heh, the surge is only a couple weeks old.
Wait till September. As John Travolta said in Broken Arrow: “This is war. And war is a very fluid situation. Which is something you wouldn’t know jack shit about.”
TallDave on July 11, 2007 at 4:08 PM
MB4
Mind boggling will be the word for the actions our enemies will either do or threaten after it is sunk real deep just how inept and without heart the US has become. You think Iran will fear a US that cannot stomach 3k dead soldiers over 5yrs of war, think China will fear such, think any sane ally will dare put their very existence at stake for the support of such a nation. Mind boggling will be the speed at which this nations power dissolves. Paper Tiger status will be consider as a compliment for what the world will consider US.
You don’t pick a fight you are not prepared to finish. And the only thing worse than being beaten is turning b*tch mid way through.
No body should be even considering retreat from Iraq unless they have a alternative that will ensure US not having to return to Iraq after the terrorist trained in the safe haven that it will become attacks US in the future. If we stay and continue to build on what we already have invested will require far less sacrifices in the longterm than if we retreat/surrender the field then after the next attack return and start all over.
C-Low on July 11, 2007 at 4:10 PM
C-Low - “If we stay and continue to build on what we already have invested”
Murphy’s first rule of holes: When in one, first stop digging.
“You don’t pick a fight you are not prepared to finish.”
Bush has picked Islamic Nation building between Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq. The Iranians are not afraid of him.
“No body should be even considering retreat from Iraq unless they have a alternative that will ensure US not having to return to Iraq after the terrorist trained in the safe haven that it will become attacks US in the future.”
Iraq a safe haven for Al Q?
I think that the majority Shiites will have something to say about Al Q taking over Iraq. Even most of their fellow Sunnis don’t like Al Q much.
Attacks against the U.S. coming from Iraq?
Jorge Arbusto has left our borders wide open and has issued visas to the ME like there has been a going out of business sale, so why would Al Q attack the U.S. from Iraq? In fact, thanks to Bush’s open borders and mass visas to the ME policies, they may well already be here like they were before 9/11.
MB4 on July 11, 2007 at 4:45 PM
So Norm Coleman is feeling Al Franken’s hot breath on his neck, huh….
Good Gawd, what is this world coming to.
Always Right on July 11, 2007 at 4:48 PM
I have a proposal, that will put an end to this, put it forward as an ammendment to any plan for withdrawl:
it would be entertaining just to see what sort of logical pretzels the dem’s would tie themselves in
Canadian Imperialist Running Dog on July 11, 2007 at 4:48 PM
If they Iraqi Islamic Sunni v. Islamic Shiite hatred for one another is SO BAD that there will be a genocide if “we” leave, how can Bush possibly believe that “we” can ever get them to get along well enough to build that “democracy that respects the rights of their people, uphold the rule of law and fight extremists alongside America in the war on terror” ???
MB4 on July 11, 2007 at 5:06 PM
From “Sleeping Giant” to “Paper Tiger” in less than 70 years. The swiftest fall from absolute world-power history has ever seen.
The saddest lesson the rest of the world will learn from this:
1. Whatever you do, do NOT put your trust in the U.S.A., the most unreliable ally the world has ever known.
Didn’t we inflict enough pain and suffering on the Iraqi people after GW-I? When our President’s daddy showed he had completely lost the appendages that had seen him through WW-II and condemned thousands of Iraqis to the tender mercies of Saddam Hussiens attentions?
Just like we did to the South Vietnamese, the Cambodians, the Poles, the Hungarians, the Checks, etc?
The Dems and Libs are throwing this entire nation under the bus for the expediency of gaining political power, fully knowing that it will cost 10’s if not 100’s of thousands of lives in the ME. And even when they are “successful” and regain absolute political control of this country, and even after those 10’s or 100’s of thousands have died, they MUST know - They MUST KNOW - that we will have no choice but to GO BACK IN! Either that or plunge ourselves into chaos and anarchy as we try to exist without adequate supplies of oil.
Its absolutely pitiful.
And its absolutely heartbreaking to think that I will end up joining the libs in being ashamed to call myself an American.
Fatal on July 11, 2007 at 5:09 PM
AP,
You begin to sound like you’d throw 26 million Iraqis under the bus to hold a few Senate seats…please disabuse me of that notion.
I still hold to that quaint set of 7 values the Army professes: Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Selfless Service, Honor, and Integrity. I don’t see a one of those that would be satisfied by putting doubtful political expedience over our commitment to Iraq (or Afghanistan for that matter).
major john on July 11, 2007 at 5:10 PM
I expect the Democrats to betray this country. That’s what they do, after all. That’s what they did in Vietnam. But I am both bitterly angry and disappointed that any Republicans joined them.
They’re nothing but WHORES selling out to be reelected in 2008.
I spit on them, specifically, and I spit on the Senate in general as the collection of pontificating whores and corrupt cowards they are.
georgej on July 11, 2007 at 5:13 PM
Fatal writes: “The Dems and Libs are throwing this entire nation under the bus for the expediency of gaining political power, fully knowing that it will cost 10’s if not 100’s of thousands of lives in the ME.”
It will cost thousands of AMERICAN lives. Here. In the United States. The Democrats (the Traitor Party) and those Traitor Republican Whores in the Senate have given Al Qaeda a new breath of life. They have given Al Qaeda VICTORY, something that they could not win on the battlefield. They have given Al Qaeda that which bin Laden promised his followers — the PROOF that America has neither the will power nor the stamina to fight the long fight. And they will strike us again, and again, and again.
Thanks to these bast*rds and the treasonous MSM which has worked long and hard to destroy our will to fight, bin Laden has ANOTHER Mogadishu to claim as his.
georgej on July 11, 2007 at 5:22 PM
How is it conservative to support a cash and troop-sucking losing war? All the $ we are spending in Iraq is a waste, because everything is going to be blown to hell once the inevitable civil war that we are somewhat suppressing now goes full throttle once we leave. You people are blind bushies, loyal to this incompetent President, why? Just because he’s a Jesus freak, errr excuse me I mean a “man of faith”? Pathetic. No wonder the GOP is losing voters every day. The GOP needs to move toward my incredibly popular Governor Schwarzenegger’s stance and be libertarian when it comes to people’s private lives and strong and smart on defense. Electing Rudy in ‘08 is a good start.
The Sinner on July 11, 2007 at 5:28 PM
I for one do not want to trade one open borders freak, Jorge Arbusto, for another open borders freak, Rudolf “Sanctuary City Mayor” Guliania.
MB4 on July 11, 2007 at 5:35 PM
it’s not the Mexicans that are the problem, they blow leaves, they don’t blow up buildings. tough border enforcement with a guest worker program for them is fine w/ me. what we should do is restrict men from the middle east (save Israel) from being allowed in this country. the 9/11 hijackers came here legally, they didn’t cross no borders.
The Sinner on July 11, 2007 at 5:41 PM
More Americans are killed each year by illegal Mexicans than were killed by Islamic terrorists on 9/11.
MB4 on July 11, 2007 at 7:15 PM
As a Virginian, I am especially disspointed that one of my elected representatives proposed this and the other went along with it.
My question is, what is the best way to make my point to Sen. Warner? I can’t very well threaten to vote for his 2008 opponent in good consciousness, knowing that I would never vote Dem. And as far as I know there isn’t a republican challenging him in the primary that I know of… I’m dissapointed to say the least.
krabbas on July 11, 2007 at 7:23 PM
That sounds like a wildly exaggerated talk-radio talking point. What’s your source?
The Sinner on July 11, 2007 at 7:38 PM
I don’t have time to “google” it yet again. Been there, done that many times over the last year.
You can “google’ it this time.
MB4 on July 11, 2007 at 7:42 PM
Someone please answer this question: How many of the 1000 polled have actually put boots on the ground in Iraq? Do they even have the “moral authority” to participate in the poll? Why not ask the folks who are fighting and have fought in Iraq what they think?
My old high school chemistry teacher said that science experiments give the result that the folks who pay for it want Polls are the same.
Exit question: Why does anyone pay attention to polls?
Claimsratt on July 11, 2007 at 8:57 PM
Did Reid and Snowe get the approval of Al-Qaeda for this first?
We don’t want to leave them in the lurch by withdrawing before they can get in place for the takeover.
As Rumsfeld said: “Freedom is messy.”
And as Mohammad pre-added: “Looting is delightful.”
profitsbeard on July 11, 2007 at 9:24 PM
It’s clear that keeping senate seats will be important if Hillary wins in 08, so in a way, I understand this move. Public support is just about gone and the only people for the war are those who understand the long term disaster that is sure to happen when the neighboring countries start looking at Iraq like a warm apple pie sitting unguarded on a farm house window sill.
If that happens, we will have two choices…….Let it happen and face an Iran that could give us $8 a gallon gasoline and a terrorist state in western Iraq, or we can go back in there and put more American blood and treasure in harms way.
And if anyone thinks the world community is going to help us, you’re wrong. Just like the traitorous dems, the world community is intent on stamping out conservative thinking and replace it with the peacenik policy of “I’d like to buy the world a coke” mentality. The problem is that Islamo-fascists don’t drink coke, they drink the blood of the weak.
Bush and company better get this in gear and do whatever is necessary to put Iran in compliance and destroy those who oppose us with terrorist tactics. Does anyone remember the speech Bush gave after 911? “Anyone who isn’t for us is against us”. It’s no wonder support is gone. He lets Iran attack our troops in Iraq and does nothing! He sits on his thumbs while Iran develops nuclear capability! At the very least he should close the border with Iran and bomb the #ell out of some nuclear facilities in Iran.
In the respect of the GLOBAL war on terror, Bush IS, just as Bin Laden said, a paper tiger. Look at the damage done to the USSR when they pulled out of Afghanistan. THAT is the exact image we will be accepting onto the US armed forces and the US in general if we pull out of Iraq.
csdeven on July 12, 2007 at 8:53 AM
Every time I see a picture of that dumbass “Tommy” Ried I want to vomit.
ajmontana on July 12, 2007 at 1:07 PM