Posted on 11/15/2005 5:30:28 PM PST by RWR8189
Pathetic.
One expected no better of the Senate Democrats, who want to get out of Iraq as soon as possible, or sooner than possible--most of them don't really care--and who want to embarrass president Bush. But couldn't the Senate Republicans have stood and fought against passing an irresponsible resolution suggesting that Americans want to get out of Iraq more than we want to win?
The Republican leadership may have figured they didn't have the votes to defeat the Democratic proposal without giving their members a weaker alternative to vote for. But better to lose such a vote by a small margin than to go on record voting for a resolution that sends a signal of irresolution and weakness at precisely the time when a message of strength is most needed. After all, in precisely a month, the Iraqis will vote for their first government under the new constitution, and one thing they must weigh in their calculations is whether they can count on U.S. staying power in the fight against the terrorists. With today's vote in the Senate, the Republican leadership, apparently working hand in glove with White House staff, showed itself today to be tactically myopic and politically timid.
One hopes Republicans in the House will show more spine. One trusts that President Bush will not bend in any way to these winds of worry. One hopes that a year from now this vote is simply remembered as a minor hiccup on the way to success and victory in Iraq. But one doesn't win a war by showing weakness. And one doesn't win a political fight by half capitulating to one's opponents, and, in effect, accepting the premises of their critique.
All honor to the 13 Republican senators who stood up against the me-too, we-want-to-get-out-as-well-but-not-quite-as-quickly, Republican leadership: Bunning, Burr, Chambliss, Coburn, DeMint, Graham, Inhofe, Isakson, Kyl, McCain, Sessions, Thune, and Vitter. Let's hope their colleagues reconsider and join their ranks in the near future.
--William Kristol
I had thought that Graham was standing up against the appeals process for terrorists too.
But this is what USA Today (Tuesday) had to say about that matter and then they quoted Graham as it relates to the appeal of rulings of military tribunals to the federal courts.
Detainees who receive punishments ranging from 10 years in prison to death would receive an automatic appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Graham said: "Instead of unlimited lawsuits, the courts now will be looking at whether you're properly determined to be an enemy combatant and, if you're tried, whether or not your conviction followed the military commission procedures in place."
Why is Graham thinking that terrorists should get a hearing in higher courts and any appeals whatsoever?
Can Kristol back up this statement with the part of the resolution that suggests the above?
I doubt it. Because if he could have, he would have.
Delay will be back..(wink) and then it will be HAMMER TIME!!
UHHHH, MR. KRISTOL...GIMME A BREAK, YOU NEED TO BE BACKING BUSH UP, TOO.
This is what USA Today had to say today:
In addition, the 500 or so detainees would be allowed to challenge in federal court the procedure under which they were labeled enemy combatants. The compromise proposal would allow the federal court reviews in place of the tool the Supreme Court gave detainees in 2004 to fight the legality of their detentions: The right to file habeas corpus petitions in federal courts.
Exactly.
" The Iraqis aren’t a burden on this country, they are a godsend, they are our allies, they passed the ‘global test’ they are the emerging third world we all hope to help, and you COWARDS cant wait to beat feet out of their at the earliest opportunity. "
I particularly liked your "...Money Changers" tag. Insulting them is a surefire way to get them to hate us and what is happening here is the only issue this war has with the Vietnam war.
If you think this was anything less than a sellout, you are cdompletely clueless.
Yes, this was a grandstanding resolution.
Imagine that. Useless senators, grandstanding. What else is new?
Oh, my best laugh today!
Somehow I think Republicans are going to see that vaccine in action in '06 and '08 unless something drastically changes their behavior.
LOL
Defending the Congress by excusing it as a common occurrence? best you've got? Weak.
If you think this was anything less than a sellout, you are cdompletely clueless.
Yeah, sure. The media wants you to think this resolution suggests the above. So does Crystal and McCain.
Either backup Kristol's above statement with wording from the resolution, or you are a dupe.
Can't take credit for either. Very nice poster came up with the tag, I asked for permission to use as I loved it too. :-) Ditto the blogger that wrote that piece. thought it deserved wider attention. says it all, doesn't it?
The compromise proposal would allow the federal court reviews in place of ... The right to file habeas corpus petitions in federal courts.So did Graham's amendment get the detainees more? or less? access than they already had?
I can imagine only one role for a higher court in this case: to make a determination as to whether the detainee has been properly classified as an "illegal combatant" and thereby subject to military law.
Once that determination has been made, the detainee is beyond the reach of American constitutional law.
One appeal to the court, based on status, is appropriate. But that is also quite enough.
Republicans and Democrats are reading it the same way. Republicans -- except RINOS which now include George Allen and Bill Frist.
LOL Defending the Congress by excusing it as a common occurrence? best you've got? Weak.
I didn't defend congress. I didn't excuse congress. I said that the congress is grandstanding. I said that they do this all the time.
That's defending congress?
Your response is weak.
Sorry for this painful question....but, who, exactly, is doing the stabbing ?
Have I missed a prime time speech by GWB refuting the lies he seems so proud and willing to absorb? (And, I love the guy)
Who is this DeMint Guy ? He voted No on both amendments.
Then blistered Dirtbag Durbin for his lying diatribe after the votes were complete.
Using your post to post address to write our representatives if you don't mind.
House- http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
Senate- http://www.senate.gov/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.