Deauthorizing The War: The Dem's Next Great Mistake
Pelosi and Murtha wanted much more -- the imposition of controls on how the war is executed -- but they couldn't find support for their propositon. WaPo reports:
House Democrats have pulled back from efforts to link additional funding for the war to strict troop-readiness standards after the proposal came under withering fire from Republicans and from their party's own moderates.You've got to search pretty hard for anything approaching a victory for the inept and noisy Pelosi/Murtha faction, who wrongly thought the midterm election was an endorsement of cut and run in Iraq.
Repealing the Authorization is a more intelligent approach than the blundering sledgehammer swings that are Murtha's favored approach. It probably won't go anywhere, thanks to Senate rules, but unlike Pelosi/Murtha, it actually sets the stage for the debate the Dems want on the war.
The Authorization contains 23 "whereas" phrases, 10 of which mention WMDs. Reading them today, especially with Dem glasses on, they weaken the resolution's credibility. Of course, Saddam could have shipped some out, of course he was poised to re-start the program at the first opportunity, but read the resolution, and you get the sense we would have uncovered massive stockpiles of ticking biological and chemical weapons and found rows of cyclotrons humming away.
That's what was on John Kerry's mind when he spoke of his support of repeal:
"I've had enough of non-binding. The authorization that we gave the president back in 2002 is completely, completely outdated, inappropriate to what we're engaged in today."That's going to be their debate, and I say bring it on, because as usual, the Dems are launching a campaign based on fallacious assumptions. For example, the Authorization includes this:
Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime;and this:
Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested by the President to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001 or harbored such persons or organizations;and this:
Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take all appropriate actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;and these concluding whereases:
Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States, as Congress recognized in the joint resolution on Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40); and
Whereas it is in the national security of the United States to restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region ...
Do the Dems really want to repeal any of those statements? Do they want to vote to repeal an Authorization to fight international terrorism and hunt down al Qaeda?
Bring on the vote, and bring it fast! I want to see how Hil and Obama vote on this one -- you might as well call it the Dem Campaign Killing Act of 2007.