SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Flip-flops

THE PLANK MAY 25, 2007

Flip-flops

BY TNR STAFF

The passage of yesterday's withdrawal-timeline-free supplemental made a lot of Democrats pretty unhappy -- 140 Democrats voted against it, including Pelosi, while every Republican except for 2 supported it. (ABC is characterizing the vote as "a tacit acknowledgement that, at least in this round of wrangling, President George W. Bush won.") But here's an interesting twist in the Senate:

But the no vote was not the mainstream Democratic view [in the Senate]. Indeed, of the 16 sitting senators who voted against going to war to begin with, 11 voted to provide funds for U.S. troops Thursday evening. "Though I loathe this decision to fund the war, I will not take out my feelings against the troops in the field," said Majority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill., who voted against authorizing use of force in Iraq in October 2002. "Our soldiers should never be bargaining chips in this debate."Durbin was joined by Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., chair of the Armed Services Committee, who also voted against going to war nearly five years ago.

That stat surprises me, but does support a concept I wrote about a few weeks ago -- that there's something consistent in the odd combination of opposing the war at the beginning and opposing funding cuts now.

--Eve Fairbanks

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 24 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

24 comments

Ms. Fairbanks you are absolutely correct. Nothing makes my skin crawl more than hearing someone who supported the war saying things like "We gave them democracy and now they must stand up as we stand down" and things like that. As far as I am concerned, a politician who supported the war and now supports a rapid withdrawl is a weak leader blowing in the moronic political winds of the moment. I think Durbin and Levin are to be praised strongly in this situation for their leadership and courage.

- Mrdseitzer

May 25, 2007 at 12:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

...the the majority of the congressfolks and senators who voted agains this bill were all in favor of a "rapid withdrawal", one that was unfunded and put our troops at risk?

Congress originally delivered a funding bill to Bush that included all of the money he wanted and more but put a timeline on how long our troops could remain in Iraq. It established benchmarks and would have allowed for a gradual, reasonable, full funded withdrawal by sometime in 2008.

He vetoed that bill. Why was he not accused of trying to defund the troops?

And if the Dems could have actually mustered enough votes to defeat this bill, does anybody think they would have left it at that - "Sorry, troops, no cash. You'll have to get home on your own." Of course they wouldn't have. They would have drafted new legislation, tougher than this bill but perhaps a little more agreeable to the reasonable members of the GOP (admittedly, there aren't many) than the one that Bush vetoed - and sent that new bill to Bush where he could then use his veto pen to deny funding for the troops. Again, Bush would be defunding the troops, not Congress.

I'm perfectly fine with Clinton and Obama, knowing full well that the funding is going to get to the troops, casting a "nay" vote to show the Dem and independent voters - the large majority of whom want timelines - that they are as angry about this BS as the voters they were elected to represent. Let's remember who the real bad guys are here. (and please, nobody answer, "the terrorists are the bady guys!", so some other type of nonsense that would be more appropriate on The Corner or, better yet, Free Republic)

- shamey73

May 25, 2007 at 12:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I agree with your analysis that it is entirely possible to have been against getting into the war, but once war was begun to see it through to its best outcome. If I recall correctly, Gore was against the war in Nam, and he served there, and Senator Webb is vehemently opposed, yet his son is fighting in Iraq now.

- blackton

May 25, 2007 at 3:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

That's a good point, but I would be a little leery with the Webb thing (unless you are saying Webb wants a responsible funding bill because of his son). The son made his own decisions, and they shouldn't reflect upon the father's positions. Except maybe to say that they seem to have a pretty cool family, and one that is probably ripped on the the right-wing attack hounds.

- boneill

May 25, 2007 at 3:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I will let Webb speak for himself: "On the one hand, I find myself unable to vote against a measure that is necessary to fund our troops who are now in harm's way. On the other, I will not relent from my continuing efforts to bring this occupation to an end." Webb himself is the kind of person who would have fought in Iraq willingly, of that I have no doubt, all the while believing it to be a mistake. People such as he are motivated by honor and service to the country. The odd thing is, I think if many young people who do join today, who are motivated by the same desire but view Iraq as a mistake, if they stopped volunteering, would our involvement end for lack of troops? Or would Bush, even in that case, break the back of the army just to not admit defeat?

- blackton

May 25, 2007 at 4:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

That works for me. I kind of feel that Bush would break the army. I never thought about that- but they have this blood-drenched cynicism that there will be people like Webb and thousands of others who will answer the call. Boy, that monkey thread made me happy but now I am all angry again.

- boneill

May 25, 2007 at 4:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

yeah, it is kind of funny to have two different conversations with you on two different threads. I didn't even know that there were albino dolphins.

- blackton

May 25, 2007 at 4:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

the worst thing is a lot of things only occur to me after I read other peoples posts, so it ends up only being one or two people who read what i write. you at least got your witticism about Tancredo in early. You know he wanted to deport all the chihuahuas back to Mexico.

- blackton

May 25, 2007 at 5:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

At least not anymore. They were in the Yangtzee (spelling? Screw it: Yellow) but thanks to pollution and what-not they are pretty much extinct. I would like to think someone is reading this without the monkey one and would have no idea where the "i didn't even know there were no albino dolphins" line came from, and might be a little scared. Did you really live in China?

- boneill

May 25, 2007 at 5:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Those Taco Bell commercials made him furious. Ugly little bastard never even bothered to use Christ's own English.

- boneill

May 25, 2007 at 5:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

yeah, I lived in China for about 7 years, and now live in Mexico. The expat life for me. Actually, the Yangtze river is called the Changjiang river, and it runs throught the south of China, with its mouth in Shanghai. The Yellow River is the Huanghe, and is the river that is in the north of China. I think the dolphins were in the Yellow river.

- blackton

May 25, 2007 at 5:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Wow. I am kind of embarassed about that. Although it is nice for me to know my mind works in simplistic ways- does the Chinese translation start with a Y? So must the English word for it!

- boneill

May 25, 2007 at 5:18pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"does the Chinese translation start with a Y? So must the English word for it!" that is actually classic. When I studied German in Austria there was a young Brit who whenever he couldn't think of the German, just spoke English with a German accent, as though that would do the trick. And I gotta be honest, sometimes I will take a stab at Spanish by pronouncing an English word the way it would be pronounced in Spanish. And sometimes it works!

- blackton

May 25, 2007 at 5:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I asked you in another thread somewhere recently, where you lived in China. If you answered, sorry, I can't find the thread. So, if you will...? thx Also, while you're here (if you still are) where in Mexico? Still in Oaxaca? I'm not intending to be nosy, just fascinated with cities and places in countries of interest to me.

- Tgossard

May 25, 2007 at 5:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

That has got to be a great feeling, mixed with a kind of inner shame. I was once at a bar in Aden trying to teach a Somali hooker how to speak Italian so she could ask some sailor to marry her. It basically just consisted of "I love-a you so much! If I don't-a be with you I'm-a gonna die". Don't know if it worked.

- boneill

May 25, 2007 at 5:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Shanghai, China (actually, Chuansha a suburb of Shanghai) and Ixtepec, Oaxaca. As different as different can be.

- blackton

May 25, 2007 at 5:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think Dems really painted themselves into a corner with the funding thing, and now they look either foolish, dumb, hypocritical, cravenly political, or all the above. btw, how did Obama and Clinton spin their votes? I've missed a lot of news today.

- Tgossard

May 25, 2007 at 5:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oh yeah. Obama: This country is united in our support for our troops, but we also owe them a plan to relieve them of the burden of policing someone else's civil war. Governor Romney and Senator McCain clearly believe the course we are on in Iraq is working, but I do not. And if there ever was a reflection of that it's the fact that Senator McCain required a flack jacket, ten armored Humvees, two Apache attack helicopters, and 100 soldiers with rifles by his side to stroll through a market in Baghdad just a few weeks ago. He spelled "flak" wrong, though.

- boneill

May 25, 2007 at 5:39pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

recent developments in Shanghai/Chuansha, especially architecture and music. When I visit the mainland someday not to distant, it is first on my list.

- Tgossard

May 25, 2007 at 5:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What a lot of b.s. Better he stick to yes no I don't know no comment.

- Tgossard

May 25, 2007 at 5:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It makes him look bad. It jus tisn't thinking seriously about what is happening.

- boneill

May 25, 2007 at 5:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Honestly, these votes about war funding, withdrawal, timelines, benchmarks. So many games. This is when I wish we had a national referendum. A. Get the hell out. B. Stay in and fight like hell. "Vote or die" as p-diddy would say. If you pick A, then Congress needs to start funding it like a war that's ending and if B, then they should pay whatever it takes to keep the troops equipped and so forth. Enough dicking around. Then we wouldn't have to interpret who's sorry for their initial war vote, who's regretful but not sorry, and who vote before it before they voted against it or voted against it before being for it, et cetera. My two cents. -- JFD

- stgla

May 25, 2007 at 5:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Referendum, great. But which country? Iraq or US? You gotta know if it were Iraq they would vote us out, come to think of it they same would be true with the US. We will have our own referendum soon enough. In 605 days Bush will slink back off to Texass.

- blackton

May 25, 2007 at 6:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I would agree, but to approve funding now if you don't believe in what we're doing is to compromise on a matter of deep principle -- it is a compromise that cannot be justified, only explained (as you did very well, imho). This may not be the last chance the Democrats will have to stand up, but by the time they get the nerve, another 500 American troops will have been sacrificed for nothing. How does anyone justify that as "supporting the troops"??? Neil

- purcellneil

May 25, 2007 at 8:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close