FOR SHAME, CHUCK
NEW YORK POST
Editorial
February 25, 2007
Capitol Hill Democrats have finally adopted a military strategy: They've declared a war of attrition against President Bush's policy in Iraq.
The non-binding resolutions denouncing the troop surge in Baghdad and Anbar Province were the first feint. Now Democrats are launching phase two: an attempt to "de-certify" the war by effectively nullifying the 2002 congressional authorization for the use of military force against Saddam Hussein.
Here's how New York's own Sen. Chuck Schumer outlined the Dems' line of attack:
<<< "There will be resolution after resolution, amendment after amendment . . . just like in the days of Vietnam," he 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." >>>
So much for the Democrats' insistence that they don't favor a wholesale cut-and-run from America's commitment in Iraq.
Frankly, we'd expect such sentiments from the Democrats running for president, who are falling over each other in a desperate bid to mollify the party's increasingly dominant far-left wing.
But Chuck Schumer knows better.
Or at least he used to - before he was tapped for a top leadership position, and publicly abandoned common sense in favor of toeing the party line of appeasement and surrender.
After all, it was little more than two years ago that Schumer, campaigning for re-election, pronounced himself "rather hawkish" on the War on Terror and openly boasted that he'd "voted with the president for authorization to go into Iraq."
Indeed, he added then, "My greatest brief against the Bush administration is not what they're doing overseas."
And he issued a solemn vow that "I'm never going to leave our soldiers high and dry."
That was then. Now he's invoking the Democratic "glory days" - America's defeat in Vietnam - as the rallying cry for his party's anti-war efforts.
Yet even now, with their intentions wholly apparent, the majority Democrats won't treat the issue honestly and schedule an up-or-down vote on support for the war.
Instead, they clumsily mask their plans by offering meaningless resolutions that profess to "support the troops" even while deploring their mission.
As Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell noted:
"Republicans are fighting for the right of the American
people to know where we stand. If you support this war,
say so. If you don't, say so. But you cannot say you are
registering a vote in favor of our troops unless you
pledge to support them with the funds they will need to
carry out their mission."
Which is why the Democrats refused to allow either the House or the Senate to vote on a GOP resolution that supports continued funding for the troops, even while expressing concern over the Baghdad troop surge.
That, McConnell rightly noted, is chicanery - pure and simple. "The only vote that really matters is a vote on whether to fund the troops," he said.
But that's precisely the vote the Democratic leadership is afraid of - because it would surely win an overwhelming majority, and thus bolster the president.
So instead, they've chosen a "slow bleed" - trying to tie the president's hands while simultaneously working to undercut his political support.
It's a shameful strategy - and doubly so when Chuck Schumer plays a leading role, sacrificing his principles in the process.
It's time for the Democrats to show some real courage and accept Mitch McConnell's challenge: If they really oppose this war, they need to oppose it. Defund the troops and the rebuilding effort. Bring everyone home - lock, stock and gun-barrel.
Fat chance.
nypost.com |
