Congress' New Low
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY
Editorial
Posted Wednesday, March 28, 2007
War On Terror: The United States Senate has a long history of regrettable actions. But rarely has it done something as low and damaging to America as its vote Tuesday to withdraw troops from an active battlefield.
That Democrats want the U.S. to go down to defeat in Iraq can no longer be questioned. The bill they narrowly passed would, in effect, ensure such an outcome by giving both al-Qaida terrorists and Baath Party dead-enders confidence they'll soon be able to rule Iraq through terror.
The Senate likes to call itself 'the world's greatest deliberative body.' If that was ever true, it certainly isn't today. Walking away from a just fight in order to gorge on pork hardly counts as a profile in courage. Yet that's precisely what the Democrat-dominated chamber did.
The vote was 50-48, with two Republicans — Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Gordon Smith of Oregon — joining 48 Democrats in support. One Democrat, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, voted with the 47 Republicans in opposition.
Last week, a similar measure passed the House by a 218-212 vote. It called for a U.S. troop withdrawal by the end of August 2008. The Senate bill starts the troop pullout just three months from now, with a complete withdrawal expected by March 31, 2008.
Each bill also features $24 billion in pork-barrel spending. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid kept it in to buy support from reluctant members. It's nothing but blood money for those who otherwise might be troubled by running from a fight we can still win.
Given Congress' runaway spending, its members' apparent willingness to be bought off and its disgraceful abandonment of the troops, this will go down as one of the most venal votes in the last 50 years — perhaps ever.
As usual, President Bush hit the nail on the head in a speech Wednesday to the Cattlemen's Beef Association. 'If we cannot muster the resolve to defeat this evil in Iraq,' he said, 'America will have lost its moral purpose in the world and we will endanger our citizens. If we leave Iraq before the job is done, the enemy will follow us here.'
Bush said he will veto either the Senate or House version as soon as it hits his desk. And he should. His veto will be tough to overturn, since Congress will have to muster a two-thirds vote to do so.
That said, the very fact that both houses would pass such measures sends a very bad message. Nothing good can come from either. It would imperil our troops, endanger our national security, embolden terrorists, sow seeds of doubt among allies and severely damage the morale of our armed forces.
And for what? A hundred million dollars to help fund the 2008 presidential conventions? Thirteen million for sheep 'replacement'? Three and a half million for the Capitol's guided tour program? Three million in sugar cane subsidies? And literally billions more for other pork-laden tidbits too numerous to mention?
It's one thing to say you oppose the war. But in 2002, Congress voted overwhelmingly (77-23 in the Senate and 296-133 in the House, with lots of Democratic support) to give President Bush the green light to remove Saddam Hussein, based on the best intelligence we had at the time.
Back then, the war was both popular and just. Today, it remains just — but the Democrats have walked away. A sad day for them, their party and the country they serve.
ibdeditorials.com |
