California Conservative

That’s the gist of this Strib article. Here’s what I’m basing my opinion on:

Two days before President Bush presents his new Iraq war plan, expected to include a surge in troop levels, Democrats were considering a range of ideas to counter it.

Democrats repeated a pledge Monday not to stop funds for troops now in Iraq, but they said possible actions include cutting money for a troop buildup.

In the most aggressive of the new tactics, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said he will introduce legislation today that requires Bush to get new congressional authority before sending more troops to Iraq. The bill is the first proposal in the Senate that would prohibit paying for an increase in troops over their level on Jan. 1.

Democrats are walking a tightrope with that strategy. Whichever option they choose, they’ll be branded as not supporting the troops. Kennedy’s legislation should be characterized as the Senate usurping the role of the Commander-in-Chief. There’s no legal basis for the President having to get Congressional approval twice for the same war. Kennedy will argue that the military battle was a separate war from the sectarian violence that we’re dealing with now. I’d doubt that many people will agree with that opinion.

This also puts the Democrats in the position of having to explain why they won’t support the troops that the Commander-In-Chief wants to put in there. They’d also have to justify cutting off funding for contractors supplying private security forces. They wouldn’t just say that they’re cutting off funding for Halliburton. They’d have to explain why private security personnel who are helping in the rebuilding aren’t being funded.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., have left little doubt that Congress would take steps to block the plan if Bush insisted on adding troops. But Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said the only thing Democrats can realistically do “is to cut off money for the troops,” a move he called “highly unlikely.”

Sen. McConnell might get surprised by Reid and Pelosi. They’ve done some really stupid things in the past that seemed like political suicide, like attempting to filibuster the Patriot Act into non-existence. Remember Harry bragging that they’d killed the Patriot Act? It seemed like political suicide then but he obviously didn’t pay a political price for that dangerous stunt. Sen. Reid might be thinking “Why not go 2 for 2″?

After all, thinking that Democrats make logical decisions is a fool’s game.

Technorati Tags: President Bush, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Ted Kennedy, Patriot Act

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

This entry was posted on Tuesday, January 9th, 2007 at 1:15 am and is filed under Author: Gary Gross, Iraq, Liberals, Military, Pelosi, W. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.