Senator Reid loses, General Kelly explains why we can’t
There is a great post at Politico rehashing the latest defeat in the Senate of another “surrender measure.”
Yet another Democratic amendment on Iraq failed Friday morning, and this one didn’t even earn a majority of Senate votes. The vote was 47-47 on an amendment sponsored by Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Jack Reed (D-R.I.) that would have required a change of mission in Iraq while mandating firm timetables for withdrawal. The amendment needed 60 votes to pass, and three Democrats voted against the measure, making it clear that no matter how Democrats craft their legislation, a majority of senators are uncomfortable mandating time tables for troop withdrawal. Three Republicans, Sens. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Olympia Snowe of Maine and Gordon Smith of Oregon, backed the measure.
I don’t know what it is going to do to convince Harry Reid that he is fighting a battle he cannot win and in my opinion the longer he continues to present this type of legislation, the worse it will become for the Democrats.
“Harry Reid has called up the same amendments for the same votes and gotten the same results – more gridlock on Iraq,” said Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.). “Instead of posturing for political gain, it’s time for the Senate’s leaders to sit down with those of us trying to find a consensus.”
But Reid has clearly made a calculation that he would rather force votes on firm troop withdrawal amendments instead of allowing bipartisan votes on moderate measures that may win a lot of support but wouldn’t force the president’s hand on the war.
“I ask my Republican colleagues for the courage and wisdom to join the American people and bring our troops home,” Reid said Friday morning. “Courage and wisdom demands that we do such.”
I think if Mr. Reid wishes to understand courage and wisdom, perhaps he should take a few minutes and read this speech presented by Marine Maj. General John Kelly. He just might learn a thing or two.
This fight is today, not against some potential peer competitor that might emerge 30 years from now, and will be with us for another generation or more. Our enemy is on a 100 year campaign to victory, and believes without question that he is winning. We, on the other hand, look out two years at best and seem to be wavering and looking for a way to rationalize our way out. The problem is our enemy is not willing to let us go. Regardless of how much we wish this bad dream would go away, he will stay with us until he hurts us so badly we surrender, or we kill him first. To him this is not about jobs, economic opportunity, or solving social problems in the Middle East. It is about way of life, about everyman’s and every woman’s worth and equality in the eyes of the law, about the God given rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. He doesn’t believe in these cherished concepts – we do. Our positions are irreconcilable.
Both links provide a great read if you have a few spare moments on a Friday night.
Written by Sue